Coriolis and Centrifugal force visualized in a rotating mass(loop)

[photon propeller]

Coriolis and centrifugal forces are pseudo forces induced by a rotating mass. When combined within that rotating mass they form a gravitational force structure representing direction, pathway(shape), and magnitude. Coriolis creates a spiral loop where force is twisting from both poles towards the center where they mediate,(flatten), and spiral outwards towards the equator,(centrifugal), where they separate and spiral on the surface back towards each pole continuing the cycle. This full cycle is the gravitational force structure.

 

Can all other atmospheric variables and electromagnetism be added to this force structure to more accurately predict weather? Coriolis force affects rotation oppositely in the northern and southern hemispheres.

 

Can gravity and Qed be associated when the center of the gravitational force structure is overlapped onto the vertex of partical emissions and collisions?

 

Can the force of gravity be represented by the equallibrium of psuedo forces within a rotating sphere?

[alpha2cen]

This is a Figure about the Coriolis phenomena.

Edited February 1, 2013 by alpha2cen

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

CORIOLIS and CENTRIFUGAL FORCES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reply from Mike Smith

: -

The whole aspect of Coriolis and centrifugal forces acting on spinning bodies ranging from atomic particles to the Earth to the galaxy as a system, to the whole universe needs a good discussion.

 

From visible evidence on the earth with the bulging equator, to the spinning galaxy spread out like a poached egg. It is painfully clear that the effect of Centrifugal force balanced against gravity has the clear observable effect of causing the shape. That is a spread around the equator.

Edited February 5, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

From visible evidence on the earth with the bulging equator, to the spinning galaxy spread out like a poached egg. It is painfully clear that the effect of Centrifugal force balanced against gravity has the clear observable effect of causing the shape. That is a spread around the equator.

 

Looking up Centrifugal force on Wickepedia will show two types of centrifugal force shows 2 distinct definitions.

 

 

Wikipedia quote

 

Centrifugal force (from Latin centrum, meaning "center", and fugere, meaning "to flee") is the apparent outward force that draws a rotating body away from the center of rotation. It is caused by the inertia of the body as the body's path is continually redirected. In Newtonian mechanics, the term centrifugal force is used to refer to one of two distinct concepts:

a) an inertial force (also called a "fictitious" force) observed in a non-inertial reference frame, and

b) a reaction force corresponding to a centripetal force.

The term is also sometimes used in Lagrangian mechanics to describe certain terms in the generalized force that depend on the choice of generalized coordinates.

The concept of centrifugal force is applied in rotating devices such as centrifuges, centrifugal pumps, centrifugal governors, centrifugal clutches, etc., as well as incentrifugal railways, planetary orbits, banked curves, etc. These devices and situations can be analyzed either in terms of the fictitious force in the rotating coordinate system of the motion relative to a center, or in terms of the centripetal and reactive centrifugal forces seen from a non-rotating frame of reference; these different forces are equal in magnitude, but centrifugal and reactive centrifugal forces are opposite in direction to the centripetal force.

Emphasis mine

 

Rather strangely in the U;K much of school education features centripetal force , often not even mentioning centrifugal force. It can be heard often by teachers themselves " centrifugal force does not exist" almost on a par with " God does not exist"

As is quoted above , it is used, felt, machines are manufactured that use the force.

I have shown water in the bottom of a bucket as I swing it above my head. I have had students swinging a 3 kilogram weight on the end of a rope out in the playing field. As they stagger about I was heard to shout " can you feel the force ". "Yes Sir," they replied before swaying and staggering to a stop.

By concentrating on the reaction only we can forget the inertia version. Planets move with it. Satellites obey the laws Wonders await those who see the action of centrifugal force at play here at Earth and Across the Universe and :-

who knows within atomic angular momentum .( still an area of discussion ).

Edited February 8, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Bill Angel]

Looking up Centrifugal force on Wickepedia will show two types of centrifugal force shows 2 distinct definitions.

 

 

Wikipedia quote

Centrifugal force (from Latin centrum, meaning "center", and fugere, meaning "to flee") is the apparent outward force that draws a rotating body away from the center of rotation. It is caused by the inertia of the body as the body's path is continually redirected. In Newtonian mechanics, the term centrifugal force is used to refer to one of two distinct concepts:

 

a) an inertial force (also called a "fictitious" force) observed in a non-inertial reference frame, and

 

b) a reaction force corresponding to a centripetal force.

 

The term is also sometimes used in Lagrangian mechanics to describe certain terms in the generalized force that depend on the choice of generalized coordinates.

The concept of centrifugal force is applied in rotating devices such as centrifuges, centrifugal pumps, centrifugal governors, centrifugal clutches, etc., as well as incentrifugal railways, planetary orbits, banked curves, etc. These devices and situations can be analyzed either in terms of the fictitious force in the rotating coordinate system of the motion relative to a center, or in terms of the centripetal and reactive centrifugal forces seen from a non-rotating frame of reference; these different forces are equal in magnitude, but centrifugal and reactive centrifugal forces are opposite in direction to the centripetal force.

Emphasis mine

 

 

Rather strangely in the U;K much of school education features centripetal force , often not even mentioning centrifugal force. It can be heard often by teachers themselves " centrifugal force does not exist" almost on a par with " God does not exist"

As is quoted above , it is used, felt, machines are manufactured that use the force.

I have shown water in the bottom of a bucket as I swing it above my head. I have had students swinging a 3 kilogram weight on the end of a rope out in the playing field. As they stagger about I was heard to shout " can you feel the force ". "Yes Sir," they replied before swaying and staggering to a stop.

 

By concentrating on the reaction only we can forget the inertia version. Planets move with it. Satellites obey the laws Wonders await those who see the action of centrifugal force at play here at Earth and Across the Universe and :-

 

who knows within atomic angular momentum .( still an area of discussion ).

Another good example of the importance of centrifugal force is showcased at the circus. I recently had the opportunity to observe these performers and make a video of their activities.

 

 

It's interesting to speculate how the globe would move with the riders in it if, instead of the globe being firmly anchored to the earth, it was lifted into the air and allowed to rotate about its vertical axis while the cyclists moved about inside of it.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Another good example of the importance of centrifugal force is showcased at the circus. I recently had the opportunity to observe these performers and make a video of their activities.

 

 

It's interesting to speculate how the globe would move with the riders in it if, instead of the globe being firmly anchored to the earth, it was lifted into the air and allowed to rotate about its vertical axis while the cyclists moved about inside of it.

 

Interesting video clip a) as I have been and am a motorcyclist and B) because I am an advocate of the hidden qualities of centrifugal forces.

 

I really would like to visit this subject, as I had some interesting contact with Professor Laithwaite of Imperial college London some years ago before he died. This, concerning Centrifugal force. He invented the linear motor, and magnetic levitation. But he also was a passionate advocate of the hidden potential of centrifugal forces.

Edited April 11, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Interesting video clip a) as I have been and am a motorcyclist and B) because I am an advocate of the hidden qualities of centrifugal forces.

 

I really would like to visit this subject, as I had some interesting contact with Professor Laithwaite of Imperial college London some years ago before he died. This, concerning Centrifugal force. He invented the linear motor, and magnetic levitation. But he also was a passionate advocate of the hidden potential of centrifugal forces.

 

I am sure this is another example of " every body is saying the king has a beautiful suit of clothes on , when he is really naked.

This business of " there is no such thing as centrifugal force " that seems to have been perpetuated by lower school removal from the corriculum , because everybody else is saying " The king has a beautiful suit of clothes " . THE KING HAS NO CLOTHES ON !

 

Surely Isaac newton establishes that " Everything likes to move in a strait line unless acted upon by a force. "

That is how it is ! So if you try and move anything in a curve , away from that strait line you get this effect of centrifugal force caused by the inertia wanting to go on in a strait line. Its a force, we have all felt it countless times, every time we go from strait to curve.

We live on a curve ( World ) its spinning at roughly 1000 miles per hour. The centrifugal force is pushing us ( away from the center. That's what centrifugal means ) Now if that spinning was not 1000 miles per hour but 17 times that namely 17,700 miles per hour , centrifugal force would equal gravity and we would all float in the air like helium balloons.

 

So if you want to float off into space that's all you need to do , go 17,700 mph . Thats what NASA does when it sends a rocket down range. Shoves it by rockets to 17,700 mph and then lets go . IN ORBIT .

 

You do not need to go 100-500 miles up to do this. You can do it right here 3 feet off the ground. ( at least science says you can ) . Whether practically you can is another issue.

 

Lots of people think it can be done ! I think it can be done .

Edited May 12, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[studiot]

 

Rather strangely in the U;K much of school education features centripetal force , often not even mentioning centrifugal force. It can be heard often by teachers themselves " centrifugal force does not exist" almost on a par with " God does not exist"

Mike, have you considered they may have a point?

It could be suggested that the comparison in your post fails to address the central (pun intended) issue viz that the introduction of fictious forces reduces a problem from one of dynamics, whether lagrangian or other, to one of statics ie equilibrium. It also allows Newton's third law to be presented as "to every force there is an equal and opposite counterforce".

 

[swansont]

If you teach and apply Newton's laws of motion, there is no centrifugal force. Centrifugal forces only exist when you are in an accelerating reference frame.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

If you teach and apply Newton's laws of motion, there is no centrifugal force. Centrifugal forces only exist when you are in an accelerating reference frame.

 

So what is the balancing force to gravity When a satellite is in Orbit ?

 

.

 

Surely this is Centrifugal Force. Otherwise the Satellite would fall out of the Sky.

 

[ Please don.t come out with the " Firing a cannon ball off the top of a mountain. "

 

That's just another way of looking at it without the forces .]

[studiot]

A body in orbit is not in equilibrium, therefore no 'balancing force' is required.

 

That is the whole point of the laws of dynamics, or the second sentence of swansont's post#2.

[swansont]

So what is the balancing force to gravity When a satellite is in Orbit ?

 

Is a satellite moving in a straight line? (Hint: look at studiot's post)

[D H]

Looking up Centrifugal force on Wickepedia will show two types of centrifugal force shows 2 distinct definitions.

 

That's wikipedia for ya.

 

Sometimes it's very good, other times, not good at all. This is one of those other times. Wikipedia has a perennial problem of giving undue voice to borderline topics. The concept of a "reactive centrifugal force" is one of those borderline topics that physics educators have been trying to eliminate for over a hundred years.

 

 

So what is the balancing force to gravity When a satellite is in Orbit ?

 

There is no balancing force from the perspective of an inertial frame of reference. There can't be. The satellite is moving, and the motion is not along a straight line at a constant velocity. This means the net force cannot be zero.

 

 

Satellite.jpg

 

Surely this is Centrifugal Force. Otherwise the Satellite would fall out of the Sky.

 

Surely not.

 

 

[ Please don.t come out with the " Firing a cannon ball off the top of a mountain. "

 

That's just another way of looking at it without the forces .]

 

Newton's cannon is an excellent way of looking at orbits. You should try to understand it.

[photon propeller]

Specific orbital energy can equal zero and does when the body's kinetic energy is exactly equal to its potential energy. This is the balancing act. Positive, zero or negative net energy affects the shape of the orbit.

[swansont]

Specific orbital energy can equal zero and does when the body's kinetic energy is exactly equal to its potential energy. This is the balancing act. Positive, zero or negative net energy affects the shape of the orbit.

 

Only negative mechanical energy corresponds to a closed orbit. What's the connection to centrifugal force?

[photon propeller]

centrifugal force is reacting to centripetal force which is causing the curved path of the satellite. the net can be pos, neg or zero resulting in the barycenter

[EdEarl]

Is Einstein's curved space another explanation for the orbit of a satellite, or is that idea related, if so how?

Edited May 22, 2013 by EdEarl

[photon propeller]

Is Einstein's curved space another explanation for the orbit of a satellite, or is that idea related, if so how?

Gravity is responsible for spacetime curvature, centrifugal and centripetal forces are manifestations of gravity in a rotating reference frame

Edited May 22, 2013 by photon propeller

[swansont]

centrifugal force is reacting to centripetal force which is causing the curved path of the satellite. the net can be pos, neg or zero resulting in the barycenter

 

The centripetal force and centrifugal force cannot be an action-reaction force pair, because they are acting on the same object. The centripetal force is gravity. The centrifugal force is decidedly not. As D H has already said, there is no reaction force to the centrifugal force. There doesn't have to be — Newton's laws do not apply in that accelerated frame of reference. The fictitious force is added in to make F=ma seem like it works.

 

Gravity is responsible for spacetime curvature, centrifugal and centripetal forces are manifestations of gravity in an inertial reference frame

 

Centrifugal forces do not appear in inertial reference frames. (unless there is a physical mechanism involved. Like a rocket, actually pushing you away from the center). Discussing GR in this context merely confuses an issue that already contains far too much confusion.

[photon propeller]

The centripetal force and centrifugal force cannot be an action-reaction force pair, because they are acting on the same object. The centripetal force is gravity. The centrifugal force is decidedly not. As D H has already said, there is no reaction force to the centrifugal force. There doesn't have to be — Newton's laws do not apply in that accelerated frame of reference. The fictitious force is added in to make F=ma seem like it works.

 

 

Centrifugal forces do not appear in inertial reference frames. (unless there is a physical mechanism involved. Like a rocket, actually pushing you away from the center). Discussing GR in this context merely confuses an issue that already contains far too much confusion.

I mispoke on inertial reference frames, i have edited my comment to state rotating frames. If we have to apply fictitious force in order for correct predictions are they really fictitious, or just different forms of one gravitational force?

[D H]

Specific orbital energy can equal zero and does when the body's kinetic energy is exactly equal to its potential energy. This is the balancing act.

 

Gravitational potential energy is negative semidefinite, meaning that it is always negative or zero. It is zero in the limit of distance tending to infinity, negative for all finite distances. Kinetic energy is positive semidefinite, meaning that it is always positive or zero. Specific orbital energy is the sum of gravitational potential energy and kinetic energy, divided by mass. It is zero for a parabolic trajectory. There's no balancing act here. The object is escaping.

 

 

Positive, zero or negative net energy affects the shape of the orbit.

 

Positive energy means a hyperbolic trajectory. All bound orbits, circular or elliptical, have total energy less than zero.

 

There's no balancing act. How can there be? An orbiting body is accelerating.

[photon propeller]

Isnt the balancing act between bound and unbound, the pinnacle being escape velocity? Are orbiting masses not tending towards gravitational equilibrium?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

 

 

An orbiting body is accelerating.

 

This is keeping the accelerating as firstly by mathematical calculation of the movement towards the center . And Secondly by forces balanced surely.

If there was no centrifugal force and you were free in an elevator but held above the earth you would feel the force of gravity pulling you into the floor of the elevator. If the elevator was now made to be circling the earth at approx 17,700mph the gravitational force would slowly be overcome by a force acting radially away from the center until the force of gravity was balanced. This would surely be described as centrifugal force, caused by the increase of orbital speed from 0 to 17,700 mph

Edited May 22, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[MigL]

Mike, you've got to understand that an orbit is no different from a fall, a very extended one which never quite ends.

And if you are falling you don't feel the force of gravity. There is no need for 'balancing' with a so-called centrifugial force.

 

A body's natural state of motion is along a geodesic, which in the absence of curved space-time, is a straight line. Once a body enters an area of curved space-time, ie feels the force of a gravitating mass, that body is accelerated towards the centre of that mass, ie it falls or followes a 'curved' geodesic. if its original speed is optimized to the force ( gravity is centripetal ) or acceleration, the result is a stable orbit.

 

There is no need for any other ( fictitious ) forces to account for this effect.

[swansont]

I mispoke on inertial reference frames, i have edited my comment to state rotating frames. If we have to apply fictitious force in order for correct predictions are they really fictitious, or just different forms of one gravitational force?

 

We add in fictitious forces when we aren't in an inertial frame. Inertial frames are where Newton's laws apply. Fictitious forces allow us to pretend we are in an inertial frame. Like you can pretend you are stationary on the surface of the earth. You really aren't and on a global scale there are implications — the Coriolis force is the result.