I also think this problem is fascinating. But the question remains: what
will the pivoting beam (balanced) do when struck by the 2 falling masses?
What I've tried to do, to simplify the problem, is eliminate as many
variables as possible, i.e. friction, vibration, windage, no spin component
on the masses, no absorbtion losses, etc, etc.
There is only the balanced pivoting beam, the 2 falling masses, and the
spring/catch mechanism. The problem has been reduced to simple
action-reaction. Basic ground level mechanics really :)
I agree that in the instance of both falling masses applying equal and
opposite force to the beam, it will not move. But what happens when the
spring/catch mechanism is introduced? Does the beam still not move? Or does
the beam pivot down towards the non-spring impact side?
Bill.
At 09:57 11/03/98 -0900, you wrote:
>Bill,I JUST COULD NOT RESIST WHAT AT FIRST SEEMS A VERY BASIC PHYSICS
>MODEL IS MUCH MORE FACINATING
>1 If the forces are equal and VECTORS parallel and strike the beam
>perpendicular to the beam.
>2 the arms of the beam are equidistant from pivot.
>3 the spheres are not spinning when dropped.
>4 no absorption losses occur in the impact.
>5 and if the beam is infinitly rigid.
> Equal energy will be transmitted to the pivot .
>Total energy transferred to the pivot will be the combined kinetic
>energy of the spheres/the potential energy(mass) of the beam.
>
>NO NET WORK WILL BE PERFORMED AT THE END OF THE ARM.
>AS EQUAL AND OPPOSING FORCES WILL CANCEL EACH OTHER.
>
>HOWEVER VERY INTERESTING THINGS HAPPEN WHEN ANY OF THE ABOVE CRITERIA IS
>NOT MET AND MODELING BECOMES MUCH MORE COMPLEX.
>
>1 harmonics will be a factor as in the real world there are no perfectly
>rigid beams(varing absorption losses), arm length, varying arm mass
>would cause vibratory nodes to reach the pivot at varying times changing
>the momentary energy transferand the total transfer due to losses.
>2 sphere rotation will be a factor as any sphere rotation will change
>total kinetic energy for that sphere ,and how that additional energy is
>transmitted to the beam,(friction) at impact ,duration of contact
>(absorption losses)vector of net energy gain to beam.
>(SHADES OF BESSLERS WHEEL?)
>3 ANGLE OF IMPACT (IF IN FACT GRAVITY SUCKS)THEN THE SPHERES WILL BE
>SLIGHTLY CLOSER TOGETHER AT IMPACT THAN WHEN THEY WERE DROPPED THEN
>THE IMPACT ANGLE TO THE BEAM WILL NOT BE PERPINDICULAR.
>4 Resistance to deformity at impact(superball,vrs steel)brings up
>complex material relationship impact losses and material ability to
>and speed of recovery to deformity.
>
>AS MY OLD CALC PROF SAID "VERY INTERESTING BUT IT IS ALL CRAP"
>
>HOPE ALL OF THIS HELPS PROBABLY JUST MUDDIED THE WATERS
>
>