Deriving formula for force by thought experiment

In summary, this conversation discusses the concept of force and its relation to displacement and mass. The participants consider different scenarios, including the impact of a fist on a ball and using a spring for a thought experiment, to explore the formula F = md. They also discuss the concepts of impulse and work as alternative ways to measure the impact of force. It is suggested that instead of asking why force is not proportional to MD, one should ask why it is, in order to reduce the number of possible explanations.
  • #1
Boltzman Oscillation
233
26
TL;DR Summary
Was thinking of how I can derive force from a simple thought experiment but I came up with F = md where d is displacement. Why can it not be this?
Hi all, I was thinking punching a round ball on a flat surface and seeing how I could determine a formula for force from it. I thought the following:

1. The ball will go further the harder I punch and thus force must be proportional to displacement d.

2. Ball will go further if it is lighter thus force is inverse proportional to m.

This I came up with F = md. If I experimented I would assume to get the wrong answer since force is F=ma in classical physics. So I came up with the following to challenge the outcome of F=md:

1. displacement does not take into consideration friction.
2. Even if the formula was correct then it would be useless for determining gravity as the ball would eventually be stopped by the ground and if there is no ground and the ball was falling forever then the displacement would be infinite and the force would be infinite. This brings us back to 1 if we see the ground as 100% friction and no ground as 0% friction.

Are there any other ideas I'm missing as to why F != md?
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
If you choose not a round ball but spring displacement for your thought experiment, you will be able to get force in proportion to d.
 
  • #3
Boltzman Oscillation said:
Are there any other ideas I'm missing as to why F != md?
I feel like you've done this backwards. Instead of asking why ISN'T force proportional to MD, ask why force IS proportional to MD. Otherwise the only real answer you can get is, "That's not how nature works".
This way, if you do find a situation in which f=md, you only have one situation to describe, not an infinite number of examples or explanations of why it doesn't.
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50 and vanhees71
  • #4
Boltzman Oscillation said:
Are there any other ideas I'm missing as to why F != md?
You are assuming that the strength of the impact of fist on ball is characterized by "force". It is not.

If one multiplies (actually integrates) the force of the impact by the duration of the impact, one can get "impulse" -- the amount of momentum transferred.

If one multiplies (actually integrates) the force of the impact by the distance traversed during the impact, one can get "work" -- the amount of energy transferred.
 
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur, PeroK and vanhees71
  • #5
Drakkith said:
I feel like you've done this backwards. Instead of asking why ISN'T force proportional to MD, ask why force IS proportional to MD. Otherwise the only real answer you can get is, "That's not how nature works".
This way, if you do find a situation in which f=md, you only have one situation to describe, not an infinite number of examples or explanations of why it doesn't.
Interesting, I should be asking why something is and not isn't in order to reduce the answers. Thank you for the advice!
 
  • #6
jbriggs444 said:
You are assuming that the strength of the impact of fist on ball is characterized by "force". It is not.

If one multiplies (actually integrates) the force of the impact by the duration of the impact, one can get "impulse" -- the amount of momentum transferred.

If one multiplies (actually integrates) the force of the impact by the distance traversed during the impact, one can get "work" -- the amount of energy transferred.
I'm sorry are you saying that the strength of the impact is not related to force? What do you mean by that? If I hit a ball with more force than someone else did to a similar ball than my ball would go further would it not?
 
  • #7
anuttarasammyak said:
If you choose not a round ball but spring displacement for your thought experiment, you will be able to get force in proportion to d.
Ah, another classic problem. Thank you, I will try to work this one out similarly and see what I can get.
 
  • #8
Boltzman Oscillation said:
I'm sorry are you saying that the strength of the impact is not related to force? What do you mean by that? If I hit a ball with more force than someone else did to a similar ball than my ball would go further would it not?
Not necessarily. It depends on more than just a single number for force.

For a ball projected on a flat surface with kinetic friction, the distance traveled will scale with energy transferred. A fellow applying a small force with a shuffleboard stick can get as much distance as another fellow applying a large force with a hammer.
 
  • Like
Likes nasu
  • #9
Boltzman Oscillation said:
If I hit a ball with more force than someone else did to a similar ball than my ball would go further would it not?
What matters is the force integrated over the collision duration, not the maximal value of force reached.
 
  • Like
Likes jbriggs444
  • #10
Boltzman Oscillation said:
If I hit a ball with more force than someone else did to a similar ball than my ball would go further would it not?
It would have a greater acceleration. That's Newton's second law.
 
  • #11
Boltzman Oscillation said:
Are there any other ideas I'm missing as to why F != md?
Force is a vector:

Explain circular motion, where force and velocity are orthogonal.

Distance is frame dependent. If you hit something that's already moving It may stop.

Without friction or orher retarding forces, the total distance is infinite for any force given as a single impulse.

The units are wrong.

...
 
  • #12
Boltzman Oscillation said:
If I hit a ball with more force than someone else did to a similar ball than my ball would go further would it not?
No. Strike a cannonball with a hammer and see how far it goes. The answer is almost nowhere even though the instantaneous force of the strike was large.

Now shoot the cannonball from a cannon. The pressure on the ball acts for the whole time the ball is in the barrel. But the maximum force on the ball may be less than the maximum with the hammer.

As others said, force times time is what counts. Not force alone. If the force varies with time, then force times time becomes the integral of force with respect to time.
 
  • #13
jbriggs444 said:
Not necessarily. It depends on more than just a single number for force.

For a ball projected on a flat surface with kinetic friction, the distance traveled will scale with energy transferred. A fellow applying a small force with a shuffleboard stick can get as much distance as another fellow applying a large force with a hammer.
I see what you mean. Thank you.
 

FAQ: Deriving formula for force by thought experiment

What is a thought experiment?

A thought experiment is a mental exercise or hypothetical scenario used to explore and understand complex concepts or theories. It involves using one's imagination and reasoning to analyze a problem or situation.

How can a thought experiment be used to derive a formula for force?

In a thought experiment, one can imagine different scenarios and manipulate variables to understand the relationship between them. By considering different scenarios involving force and its effects, one can derive a formula that explains the relationship between force, mass, and acceleration.

What is the significance of deriving a formula for force through a thought experiment?

Deriving a formula for force through a thought experiment allows one to understand the fundamental principles and laws governing the physical world without the need for physical experiments. It also allows for a deeper understanding of the concept of force and its relationship with other variables.

Are there any limitations to deriving a formula for force through a thought experiment?

While thought experiments can provide valuable insights and understanding, they are limited by the assumptions and simplifications made in the hypothetical scenarios. These may not always accurately reflect real-world situations and may not account for all factors that can affect force.

How can the formula for force derived from a thought experiment be validated?

The formula for force derived from a thought experiment can be validated through physical experiments and observations. By testing the formula in real-world scenarios and comparing the results to the predicted values, one can confirm its accuracy and applicability.

Back
Top