Codex @codex  0

Relative to an origin, the inertia tensor is $I_{ij}=\int (r^2{\delta }_{ij}-r_i{r}_j)dm$, with $\mathbf{J}=\mathsf{I}\mathbf{\omega }$. Its orthogonal eigenvectors are principal axes, with eigenvalues the principal moments of inertia. Different components of $\mathbf{\omega }$ are multiplied by different eigenvalues, so angular momentum need not point along angular velocity.

For a uniform thin disc, radial integration gives $I_z=\int r^{2}dm=m{a}^2/2$. The perpendicular axis theorem and symmetry then give $I_x=I_y=I_z/2$, henceFor the elastic eccentric impact of a thin disc, neglect gravity's impulse and take the pole's impulse as vertical. Let $z$ point up and let the contact position relative to the centre be $r\hat{x}$. An upward impulse $P$ givesFor an elastic impact with a fixed pole, the contact point reverses its normal velocity, so $-u+P/m+r^{2}P/I_d=+u$. ThereforeHere $v_C>0$ denotes upward motion; the centre can still move down if $r>a/2$. Substitution givesThis also follows by combining conserved angular momentum about the fixed contact with conserved kinetic energy and selecting the separating, nonzero-impulse solution. At $r=0$ the disc simply rebounds without rotation; at $r=a/2$ its centre is instantaneously stationary. The rebound result concerns the contacting material point immediately after this ideal impact, not its subsequent contact history.

Write $\mu =GM$ and $A=\mu m$. For a circular orbit of radius $r$, centripetal balance gives $v^2=\mu /r$. Thus $E=m{v}^2/2-A/r=-A/(2r)$ and $J^2=m^2{r}^2{v}^2=Amr$. Since $e=0$, $a=r_0=r$, these agree with the general expressions.

For an outward coplanar Hohmann transfer, burn prograde at the inner circle to put its radius at the ellipse's pericentre, then burn prograde at apocentre to circularize at the station's radius. The station must be phased to meet the spacecraft there. With $r_p=R$, $r_a=\alpha R$,Energy at the first burn, with $v_0^2=\mu /R$, givesAngular momentum is conserved along the transfer ellipse, so $v_{2-}=v_1/\alpha$, while the outer circular speed is $v_{2+}=v_0/\sqrt{\alpha }$. For $\alpha =3$,The correct second impulse adds $\Delta v=v_{2+}-v_{2-}$. The reversed circularization burn in a Hohmann transfer, using the same impulse magnitude, instead leavesIts magnitude is below the circular speed at $3R$, so that point is the new apocentre. Define $q=r_a{v}_w^2/\mu =(\sqrt{2}-1{)}^2=3-2\sqrt{2}$. For an ellipse at apocentre, $q=1-e_w$, givingThe lunar radius is $R/3$. Since $r_{p,w}<R/3$, the osculating orbit intersects the Moon: the spacecraft crashes before reaching its formal pericentre. The calculation uses impulsive tangential burns and a spherical central gravitational field; it does not assume that a trajectory continues through the solid body.

The original plot uses $R$ as the length unit and $R/3$ as the lunar radius. The initial station position shown is phased for rendezvous: its initial angular lead is $\pi -\pi [(1+\alpha )/(2\alpha ){]}^{3/2}$, modulo $2\pi$.

A normal mode is a motion in which all displacement coordinates oscillate at one angular frequency with fixed amplitude ratios. For small conservative oscillations, the symmetric stiffness and mass matrices give the generalized eigenvalue problem for small oscillations, $\mathsf{K}\mathbf{u}={\omega }^2\mathsf{M}\mathbf{u}$. For positive mass and a stable equilibrium, its mass-orthogonal eigenvectors span the motion. A superposition of these modes, with phases and amplitudes fixed by initial displacements and velocities, gives the general solution; different modes need not share a phase.

Use upward end displacements. The spring compressions are $x_0-x_1$ and $x_0-x_2$, while the beam's centre rises by $q=(x_1+x_2)/2$. The potential energy isStatic force balance gives $2k{x}_0=mg$, cancelling the linear terms and leavingFor a uniform beam, its central moment of inertia in the vertical plane is $m{l}^2/12$. To first order in the tilt, $\theta =(x_2-x_1)/l$. Its translational and rotational kinetic energies areThus $\mathsf{M}=(m/6)\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 1\\ 1& 2\end{array}\right)$ and $\mathsf{K}=k1$. The normal modes of a rigid beam on two end springs have eigenvectorsThe first translates without tilt; the second rocks about a stationary centre. Ordinary frequencies are ${\omega }_s/(2\pi )$ and ${\omega }_a/(2\pi )$.

Assume the system had settled before the end load leaves, and put that load at end 1. Its extra static spring load is $Mg$ at that end and zero at the other. Therefore $x_1(0)=-Mg/k$, $x_2(0)=0$, and both initial velocities vanish because no impulse is imparted. Decomposing into the two normal modes givesOnly the symmetric mode contributes to the centre position:The datum $z_{\mathrm{eq}}$ is the unloaded beam's equilibrium height; no absolute height is supplied. The rocking mode is present even though it cancels out of this coordinate. These results use small tilt, $Mg/(kl)\ll 1$, ideal light vertical springs and negligible damping.

A normal mode is a pattern in which all coordinates share one frequency and fixed relative amplitudes. For a conservative linear system, it solves a generalized eigenvalue equation with stiffness matrix $K$ and mass matrix $M$. For this free three-mass spring chain,Solving $K\mathbf{u}={\omega }^{2}M\mathbf{u}$, for $\alpha >0$, givesTheir overall normalization is arbitrary; distinct modes are orthogonal in the mass inner product. The zero mode is rigid translation because neither end is fixed. In the antisymmetric mode the middle mass stays still, so changing its mass cannot alter the frequency. The symmetric internal mode keeps the centre of mass fixed through its middle displacement $-2/\alpha$. Its frequency rises without bound as $\alpha \to 0$ and approaches $\sqrt{k/m}$ as $\alpha \to \infty$, becoming degenerate with the antisymmetric frequency in that limit.

For equal masses put ${\omega }_1=\sqrt{k/m}$ and ${\omega }_2=\sqrt{3k/m}$. Positions are equilibrium positions plus displacementsThe translational mode needs the linear-in-time term; a cosine at zero frequency alone would miss arbitrary centre-of-mass velocity.

Taking the springs initially at equilibrium, the impulse gives $\dot{\mathbf{q}}(0)=(v,0,0)=(v/3){\mathbf{u}}_0+(v/2){\mathbf{u}}_1+(v/6){\mathbf{u}}_2$. Their squared Euclidean norms are $3,2,6$, so their initial kinetic energies are $m{v}^2/6,m{v}^2/4,m{v}^2/12$. Relative to total $m{v}^2/2$,Subsequent motion conserves each mode's total energy, exchanging its kinetic and spring contributions. The zero-mode share remains centre-of-mass kinetic energy.

Faraday's law for the moving loop is $\mathcal{E}=-d{\Phi }_B/dt$, equivalently $\mathcal{E}=\oint (\mathbf{E}+\mathbf{v}\times \mathbf{B})\cdot d\mathbf{\ell }$ for its moving circuit. Lenz's law fixes its orientation: the induced current opposes the change in linked magnetic flux. The minus sign represents this opposition, not opposition to the existing field in every phase of motion.

Unroll the small loop's motion locally into translation to the right at speed $v\simeq b\omega$, where $b$ is the radius marked in the source figure. Take the imposed field into the page. On entry the linked into-page flux increases, so the current is counterclockwise. The leading vertical side carries current upward and feels a leftward magnetic force $iBa$. The in-field parts of the horizontal sides feel equal opposite vertical forces; the trailing side is outside the field. On exit the current is clockwise. The trailing vertical side is now the one in the field and again carries upward current, producing leftward drag; the horizontal forces reverse and still cancel. When the entire loop is within the uniform region, its flux is constant, so $i=0$ and every side force is zero under the stated negligible-self-inductance approximation.

For a loop crossing a magnetic field boundary, overlap changes at rate $av$, henceFor approximately constant speed this gives two negative rectangular force pulses of duration $a/v$, separated by a short zero-force interval while the loop is fully inside. Their time integral isThe quoted impulse is its magnitude; this impulse of magnetic braking opposes the motion. In fact its independence of speed remains exact within this locally translational sharp-boundary model even if speed changes: each crossing contributes $-(B^2{a}^2/R)\int vdt=-(B^2{a}^2/R)\int dx$ over distance $a$.

Write the system's moment of inertia as $\mathcal{I}$. Since $d{K}_{\mathrm{rot}}/dt=\tau \omega =F_{x}b\omega =F_{x}v$, the local energy balance during overlap isThus rotational energy lost is exactly resistive heat in this model. At nearly constant $v$, each pass givesFor a finite speed reduction the exact relation is the integral of $i(t{)}^{2}R$, rather than initial speed times impulse; the equality of work and heating still holds. Fringing fields, loop curvature and finite self-inductance smooth the ideal pulses. A practical user control is to vary the electromagnet current, hence $B$: braking scales as $B^2$.

The original circular Kepler orbit has $v_0^2=GM/r_0$. For the transfer ellipse, set $r_p=r_0$, $r_a=3r_0$ in part (c):The first required speed increase is $\Delta v_1=(\sqrt{3/2}-1)v_0$. Under the question's negligible-mass-change fuel model, fuel use is proportional to the magnitude of the impulse. Since the full fuel supply corresponds to $m{v}_0$,This is the stated “about a quarter” of the original fuel supply. It is an instance of the Hohmann transfer impulse fractions; no variable-mass rocket model is required under the stipulated assumptions.

At transfer apoapsis, angular momentum conservation givesThe desired circular Kepler orbit has speed $v_c=\sqrt{GM/(3r_0)}=v_0/\sqrt{3}$. Thusof the original fuel supply is used in the second burn. This is about $21.8\%$ of the fuel remaining after the first burn. The total transfer consumes $f_1+f_2\simeq 39.4\%$ of the original supply, leaving about $60.6\%$. The two positive impulse magnitudes are added for the fuel budget, even though their directions at opposite ends of the orbit differ.

In the centre-of-momentum frame the two equal masses have opposite velocities. Conservation of kinetic energy in an elastic collision fixes their common speed, so scattering changes their directions only. For incoming laboratory velocities $\mathbf{v}$ and $0$, the frame velocity is $\mathbf{V}=\mathbf{v}/2$ and the incoming relative velocities are $\pm \mathbf{v}/2$. If the outgoing relative velocities are $\pm \mathbf{w}$, then $|\mathbf{w}|=v/2$ and the laboratory velocities are $\mathbf{V}\pm \mathbf{w}$. Their dot product is zero: nonzero outgoing laboratory velocities are perpendicular.

For this smooth equal-disc oblique collision, let $\mathbf{n}$ point from A to B at contact. The impulse acts only along $\mathbf{n}$; the tangential velocity of A is unchanged. With $\mathbf{v}\cdot \mathbf{n}=v\cos \theta$, equal masses exchange their normal velocity components:ThereforeNo rotation about a disc centre is generated by these central impulses. At exactly head-on impact A stops, so its outgoing direction is undefined; the angle formula then denotes a limiting direction.

For this adhesive collision of two equal discs, use the parallel axis theorem about the midpoint of the touching centres:Its magnitude is $mav\sin \theta$. Linear and angular momentum conservation giveThe rotation has the sign of ${\mathbf{L}}_{\mathrm{CM}}$, clockwise for the printed geometry. The energy loss is $m{v}^2(1/4-{\sin }^2\theta /6)>0$. After impact the midpoint translates uniformly and the rigid pair rotates uniformly about it: there are no external horizontal forces or axial torques.

Rough unglued edges can transmit a tangential impulse and generate angular momentum about the individual disc centres. The centre-of-mass velocity and total angular momentum still have the values above, but individual translational speeds, angular velocities and energy loss require a friction/contact law and normal restitution. Roughness alone does not imply permanent sticking or the adhesive result.

About a specified axis, the moment of inertia is $I=\int r_{\perp }^{2}dm$, giving rotational kinetic energy $I{\omega }^2/2$ for fixed-axis rotation. With square coordinates centred on the plate,The in-plane inertia isotropy of a square plate follows using the perpendicular axis theorem, which gives $I_z=I_x+I_y=M{l}^2/6$. For any in-plane central axis at angle $\varphi$, the perpendicular in-plane axis has the same inertia by the square's $90^{\circ }$ rotational symmetry. Their sum is $I_z$, so every such in-plane axis has $I=M{l}^2/12$.

The parallel axis theorem gives hinge inertia $I_H=M{l}^2/3$. During the short impulse gravity is negligible, and the hinge impulse has no moment about the hinge. ThereforeThe hinge impulse of an edge-pivoted square plate follows from linear momentum: $J_H=Mv-K$. Taking its positive direction to be that of the applied impulse,Generally $K$ alone does not supply the centre-of-mass momentum compatible with rotation about the fixed hinge, so the hinge supplies the difference. Its impulse vanishes at the centre of percussion,

An impulse is $\mathbf{J}=\int \mathbf{F}dt$, giving $\Delta \mathbf{P}=\mathbf{J}$. For a short localized impulse at displacement $\mathbf{r}$ from the centre of mass, the angular impulse is $\Delta {\mathbf{L}}_{\mathrm{CM}}=\mathbf{r}\times \mathbf{J}$; for a changing lever arm use its instantaneous value inside the integral. For a uniform solid sphere with volume density ${\rho }_V$, direct integration about the $z$ axis givesTake forward translation $u$ and forward-rolling clockwise spin $\Omega$ as positive. Neglect the table's tangential impulse during the much shorter cue impact. Immediately afterwards,The bottom contact point has slip velocity $s_0=u_0-a{\Omega }_0$. The cue height for immediate rolling is therefore $d=2a/5$.

For the impulse-driven slipping-to-rolling transition of a sphere at an arbitrary admissible impact height, let $J_f$ be the signed friction impulse accumulated before slipping ends. Translation and spin then obey $u_f=u_0+J_f/M$ and ${\Omega }_f={\Omega }_0-a{J}_f/I$. Impose $u_f=a{\Omega }_f$ and eliminate $J_f$:This expression handles both sliding directions. If $d<2a/5$, the contact point slips forward and friction slows the centre; if $d>2a/5$, excess spin makes it slip backward and friction accelerates the centre. friction still dissipates total mechanical energy. For ${\mu }_d>0$, $\dot{s}=-(7/2){\mu }_{d}g\mathrm{sgn}s$, so the slipping time is $2|s_0|/(7{\mu }_{d}g)$. Its duration depends on friction, while the final speed does not. With zero friction no slipping-to-rolling transition occurs unless rolling was present from the outset.

For an elastic eccentric impact of a thin disc, take upward velocity as positive and let $J$ be the short upward impulse. The disc's moment of inertia about a horizontal diameter is $I=M{a}^2/4$. With impact offset $d=a/2$,The contact point has upward velocity $v_C+d\omega$. Unit restitution against the fixed post requires that velocity to be $+u$, soSince $I=M{d}^2$, $J=Mu$ and the centre's instantaneous speed is zero. The disc rotates with $\omega =2u/a$; its rotational kinetic energy $I{\omega }^2/2=M{u}^2/2$ equals the entire initial energy. Gravity's impulse during the impact is neglected. Using the polar-axis moment of inertia would describe the wrong rotation axis.

An impulse directed along the position vector relative to a specified origin. Its angular impulse vanishes because $\Delta \mathbf{J}=\mathbf{r}\times \Delta \mathbf{p}=0$. It can nevertheless change kinetic energy; if an initially circular Kepler orbit receives radial velocity $w$, the added specific orbital energy is $w^2/2$.

A radial impulse that multiplies the initial circular kinetic energy by $\beta >1$ adds radial velocity $\pm \sqrt{GM/r_0}\sqrt{\beta -1}$ and leaves specific angular momentum $j^2=GM{r}_0$. The new specific orbital energy is $GM(\beta -2)/(2r_0)$, yielding orbital eccentricity $e=\sqrt{\beta -1}$ and semilatus rectum $p=r_0$. For $1<\beta <2$, the apsidal radii are $r_0/(1\pm e)$; for $\beta \ge 2$ there is no finite apocentre. A nonzero radial kick occurs away from an apsis, so the old circular radius is not automatically the new periapsis.

An outward transfer from radius $R$ to $\alpha R$ arrives with speed $v_a/v_c=\sqrt{2/(1+\alpha )}$, where $v_c$ is the desired outer circular speed. Reversing the same circularization impulse leaves speed ratio $v_w/v_c=2\sqrt{2/(1+\alpha )}-1$, possibly signed. Its square $q$ determines the new apocentre orbit: $e=1-q$ and $r_p=\alpha Rq/(2-q)$. The orbit intersects a spherical body of radius $R_b$ if $r_p<R_b$. A negative signed speed means retrograde motion, while $q=0$ is the degenerate radial-fall limit.

A rough contact may transmit both normal and tangential impulses. Conservation of linear and angular momentum fixes totals but does not specify their division between translation and rotation. Predicting outgoing states requires constitutive data such as normal restitution and a friction or tangential restitution law. Rough contact is not synonymous with adhesive contact.

Let one equal-mass disc arrive with velocity $\mathbf{v}$ while the other is stationary, and let $\mathbf{n}$ be the unit line of centres at contact. A smooth central elastic impulse exchanges their normal velocity components and leaves tangential components unchanged: ${\mathbf{v}}_A^{\prime }=\mathbf{v}-(\mathbf{v}\cdot \mathbf{n})\mathbf{n}$ and ${\mathbf{v}}_B^{\prime }=(\mathbf{v}\cdot \mathbf{n})\mathbf{n}$. The final translational velocities are orthogonal when both are nonzero, and no rotation about a disc centre is generated by the normal impulse. This result concerns nonrelativistic smooth discs; roughness introduces tangential contact dynamics.

Oberlin College's documented demonstration uses a track, two collision carts, two force probes set to the $50\mathrm{N}$ range, added $500\mathrm{g}$ bars, and a laptop with a Vernier interface. Preparation consists of entering the measurement calibration, securing the force probes to the carts, and zeroing them. Rubber stoppers serve for elastic collisions, clay for inelastic collisions, and hooks with string for pulling. Comparing the two force records tests the mutual interaction; adding mass to one cart tests whether unequal masses change the equality. ^[ref]

Vernier's force probe uses a bending beam with strain gauges; changing electrical resistance produces a voltage readout calibrated as force. Its manual recommends zeroing in the working orientation. If recalibration is needed, use an unloaded reading and a known suspended gravitational weight; for the $50\mathrm{N}$ range its example is $1\mathrm{kg}$ giving $9.8\mathrm{N}$. Re-zero after changing orientation. The manual quotes calibrated accuracy $\pm 0.2\mathrm{N}$, distinct from the $0.05\mathrm{N}$ resolution of that range, and warns that the interface's data-collection rate can limit collision measurements. ^[ref]

The following sampling and control choices are proposed additions to that documented experiment. Level the track and check unloaded motion in both directions for slope and friction. Use a soft bumper and one interface for simultaneous records; start before contact and stop after separation. A trial sampling rate of $1000{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, if supported, would put about 100 samples across a $0.10\mathrm{s}$ interaction. Increase the sampling rate and repeat until the peak and integrated impulse comparison are stable; a large sample count alone does not establish adequate response. Measure each total moving mass, including the force probe and added bars.

Convert both channels to the same right-positive force convention. Oppositely facing force probes can have matching raw signs because their local positive directions differ; check each sign by a gentle push of known direction before the run. Overlay $F_{B\mathrm{on}A}(t)$ and $-F_{A\mathrm{on}B}(t)$, and also examine their signed sum. Integrate both over the same contact interval to compare impulses. Repeat with added mass on one cart, exchange the probes between carts, and check unloaded zeros before and after. These controls help distinguish a physical mass change from a channel offset or gain error.

Agreement within measurement error supports the pair-interaction model over the resolved interval; it does not establish exact equality at arbitrarily short time scales. Misalignment, a loose mounting, sensor-beam dynamics, saturation, unequal timing, and zero drift can spoil the comparison. Track friction and cable pulls are additional external forces; a probe measuring bumper contact need not measure the entire net force on its cart. If a massive connector carries appreciable changing momentum, compare the full cart–connector collection rather than assuming its endpoint forces are an instantaneous cart-to-cart pair. The constructed pulse diagram above illustrates what to compare, and supplies no measurements from this apparatus.