Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

This sounds like homework (moved to HW help) and we’re not going to do it for you.

What have you done thus far?

Posted

Suppose an object is moving along a straight line with position given by x= t^2- 8t where x is the directed distance in meters from some fixed point and t is the time in seconds.  At t= 4 seconds its speed is 0.  Is it "at rest"?  Is it "in equilibrium"?

Posted

I am wondering if you are not confusing "equilibrium" with "stable equlibrium".

First imagine a ball rolling up a hill.  If it does not have enough kinetic energy to get to the top of the hill, it will slow to a stop, then roll back down the hill.  At the instant it stops, it is momentarily "at rest" but it is not "at equilibrium" because there is a net downward force.

Second imagine a ball sitting in a valley between two hills.  There is no net force because the downward force of gravity is offset by the upward force of the ground on the ball.  The ball is "at rest" and "at equilibrium".  If it were disturbed slightly, so that it moved a bit, it would roll back to the bottom.  That is a "stable equilibrium".

Finally imagine a ball sitting at the top of a smooth hill.  Again the only forces on the ball are gravity downward and the ground upward so there is no net force so the ball is "at rest" and "at equilibrium".  If it were disturbed slightly, so that it moved a bit, it would roll to the bottom of the hill.  That is an "unstable equilibrium".

Posted
21 minutes ago, Country Boy said:

I am wondering if you are not confusing "equilibrium" with "stable equlibrium".

First imagine a ball rolling up a hill.  If it does not have enough kinetic energy to get to the top of the hill, it will slow to a stop, then roll back down the hill.  At the instant it stops, it is momentarily "at rest" but it is not "at equilibrium" because there is a net downward force.

Second imagine a ball sitting in a valley between two hills.  There is no net force because the downward force of gravity is offset by the upward force of the ground on the ball.  The ball is "at rest" and "at equilibrium".  If it were disturbed slightly, so that it moved a bit, it would roll back to the bottom.  That is a "stable equilibrium".

Finally imagine a ball sitting at the top of a smooth hill.  Again the only forces on the ball are gravity downward and the ground upward so there is no net force so the ball is "at rest" and "at equilibrium".  If it were disturbed slightly, so that it moved a bit, it would roll to the bottom of the hill.  That is an "unstable equilibrium".

I think you are kicking a dead donkey.

Though you are working very hard,

The OP hasn't been back since the day he joined and posted.

Posted
1 hour ago, Country Boy said:

Have you ever kicked a live donkey?

The donkey will kick you back, and that's what we call "stable" equilibrium.

Posted
5 hours ago, Phi for All said:

The donkey will kick you back, and that's what we call "stable" equilibrium.

I thought so it was Newton's 3rd law action-reaction.. but what I know..

Posted
13 hours ago, Sensei said:

I thought so it was Newton's 3rd law action-reaction.. but what I know..

Newton kept his donkeys in the house because their knowledge of the law was unstable. 

Posted

It's no yoke when one of the donkeys dies. The other one just moves in a circle, and because of Newton's 1st Law, it might just burro right into the ground.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.