Non-uniform circular motion (2 Viewers)

[Aerath]

Yes.

Heh, in that case, I'd be more inclined to say that I'm wrong. But I was fairly sure I was right.

 

[cutemouse]

But do note that Cambridge is crap for circular motion.

 

[shaon0]

hey there,

just wondering if any 4U teachers at your school teach 'non-uniform circular motion'??? as part of the mechanics section,

i realise that its in none of the textbooks, but apparently you still have to do it??????? i believe it was in one of the BOS past papers

any clues?

Yeah, i have done some non-uniform circular motion questions. Don't seem really hard but they're harder than normal ones.

 

[MC Squidge]

what book should i use for circular motion?

and can u post a solution to that question jm01

 

[cutemouse]

what book should i use for circular motion?

and can u post a solution to that question jm01

Just look at the Coroneos Supplement 4U book. It's in there. Although, my teacher did give us a more concise proof based on that. But I'm sure that he wouldn't appreciate it if I started posting all his notes on the internet, which took him alot of time to do, along with solutions of selected Coroneos Supplement questions in this circular motion chapter of this book.

 

[khorne]

30 year old question...While still in the syllabus, I highly doubt they would ever ask it.

 

[cutemouse]

30 year old question...While still in the syllabus, I highly doubt they would ever ask it.

28 years (not 30), and every 28 years the calendars are identical. So you never know.

 

[khorne]

28 years (not 30), and every 28 years the calendars are identical. So you never know.

Right, I suppose we should look at the stars too and see if the questions from 28 years ago will be re-incarnated.

 

[cookiesandcream]

Our teacher gave us a copy of the syllabus, and it says 1989, so I'm pretty sure the syllabus was updated since 1981.

It says:
6.3.1 Motion of a particle around a circle
and some points about proving angular velocity

6.3.2 Motion of a particle moving with uniform angular velocity around a circle

I think the cambridge textbook was written in 1994? The Coroneos supplement was written a earlier (my school's copy was bought in 1988), so i think that's why cambridge doesn't have the stuff on non-uniform circular motion.

 

[cutemouse]

It was ammended in 1989. The main modifications were that they put in Graphs and took out circles in conics, and introduced harder 3U I believe.

I assure you that what I said earlier is still in the course, and that cambridge is a pile of **** for mechanics (esp. circular motion).

 

[chingyloke]

Fitzpatrick has an example on it, but says it's not examinable. Teacher agreed.

If it's in the exam...meh.

 

[cookiesandcream]

I believe what is in the syllabus is that you have to learn to derive the tangential and normal components of acceleration for non-uniform circular motion.

I still don't think you need to solve problems when the particle is moving in non-uniform circular motion, and since my teacher insists so, as well as Cambridge and Fitzpatrick, I'm pretty much convinced it's not in the syllabus. That's why there's a main sub-point in the syllabus concerned specifically with uniform circular motion, and not one for non-uniform.

 

[cutemouse]

I believe what is in the syllabus is that you have to learn to derive the tangential and normal components of acceleration for non-uniform circular motion.

I still don't think you need to solve problems when the particle is moving in non-uniform circular motion, and since my teacher insists so, as well as Cambridge and Fitzpatrick, I'm pretty much convinced it's not in the syllabus. That's why there's a main sub-point in the syllabus concerned specifically with uniform circular motion, and not one for non-uniform.

That is correct, as I've said before. ie. You need to be able to derive the tangential and normal components of acceleration for non-uniform circular motion. It's a 'subtlety' in the course.

 

[khorne]

Shut up jm01. No one gives a shit about your arrogant, condescending crap. Nor your teacher...Seems that you don't possess the capability to think for yourself, you just recite what your teacher says.

 

[untouchablecuz]

punch onnnnnn

 

[untouchablecuz]

Fitzpatrick has an example on it, but says it's not examinable. Teacher agreed.

If it's in the exam...meh.

Chemistry, (1/11)
Physics, (1/12)
MX1, (1/8)
MX2, (1/2)
Adv. Eng. (1/30)
EX1, (1/5)
EX2, (1/2)


holy moly

goodluck in exams!

 

[cutemouse]

Shut up jm01. No one gives a shit about your arrogant, condescending crap.

What happened to your 4th green bar in your rep? Hmmm...

Nor your teacher...Seems that you don't possess the capability to think for yourself, you just recite what your teacher says.

Coming from someone who goes to Smith's Hill High. *laughs*

 

[khorne]

Coming from someone who goes to Smith's Hill High. *laughs*

oh snap. Too bad I don't get the reference =]

 

[MC Squidge]

rofl jm01 is seething

 

[cookiesandcream]

That is correct, as I've said before. ie. You need to be able to derive the tangential and normal components of acceleration for non-uniform circular motion. It's a 'subtlety' in the course.

oh..sorry i thought everyone was talking about the later part...

We just derived it for non-uniform circular motion and apparently it's the exactly the same way as doing it for uniform circular motion