You are on page 1of 15



Home Page
Publisher Cambridge International Science Publishing, Cambridge,
Pages 330, Date o Publication !ct" #0$3" No o Cha%ters $0
About Author
Ajay Sharma is working as Assistant Director in Department of Education, Shimla (India). e is author of !ook Beyond Newton
and Archimedes. e !egan his career as a physics lecturer at DA" #ollege #handigarh (India).In the !ook he has generali$ed
%ewton&s laws and ''() years old Archimedes principle. e maintains %ewton did ne*er gi*e + ,ma !ut it was speculated !y
Eular in -./0. Archimedes has !een generali$ed as it does not account for the shape of body. e stresses formation of water
!arometer as it pro*ides alternate method for measurement of g. It has !een done for first time in the history of Science. is
second !ook Beyond Einstein and E=mc
is in press. e has pu!lished o*er (/ research papers and in*ited to o*er 1/
international conferences. 2o!ile 003- 3(-1(/0133, Email
is work is a*aila!le online at6
forth coming book Beyond Einstein and
Description of 10 Chapters
Chapter 1: 2360 Years Old Aristotle's Assertion Revalidated by Stokes Law
First Glimpse
According to Aristotles assertion of falling bodies,
heavier body falls down quickly.
It got immediate suort from the fact that a stone falls quickly than a straw.
!athematically, falling tendency mass of body.
In 1"#1,$tokes ut forth that under certain conditions the bodies attain constant
velocity. According to relevant mathematical equations,
Average velocity mass of body
It was contradicted by %alileo &1#'()1'(2* after 2+++ years of use stating that all
bodies fall with same acceleration i.e. travel equal distances in equal intervals of time. It
got immediate suort from the fact that a ten ond shot and one ond shot fall at
same time in air. ,hus
all bodies fall equal distances from equal intervals of time.

where a is acceleration
.omaring Aristotles assertion and $tokes law , it is obvious that both have similar
forms. ,hus Aristotles assertion is as useful as $tokes law in case of falling bodies.
If the resultant weight is regarded as falling tendency , then
Falling Tendency mass
,hus in this case also Aristotles assertion is /ustified. Acceleration is required to
calculate the distance travelled by body.
0i1 According to Aristotles assertion of falling bodies,
heavier body falls don !"ic#ly$.
0ii1 It got immediate suort from the fact that a stone falls quickly than a straw.
%alileo &1#'()1'(2* after 2+++ years of use contradicted Aristotles thesis and stated that
heavier and lighter bodies fall at same rate
2or e3amle a one pond and ten pond shot fall at same rate. It is resciely true in vacuum
0iii1 4nglish 5hysicist %eorge %rablei $tokes, studied effect of viscosity in small sheres and
found that they move with constant velocity.,he mathematical equation relates constant
velocity with mass
v -

v -7!
%eavier spheres &range in hich 'to#es (a holds good) fall !"ic#ly than lighter ones$.
,hus Aristotles assertion is valid in fluids 0 narrow range1 even when $tokes law is valid.
8ence abundoned Aristotles assertion, is valid uto some e3tent.
Chapter * .onstruction of 9ater, %lycerin and 4thyl Alcohol :arometers
First Glimpse
,orricelli had made mercury barometer in 1'(( and measured ressure as
5-;g8, but in ast 6<+ years the water barometer has not been formed.
,he height of water column in water barometer must be 1+.66 m.
;oes viscosity of liquid 0not taken in account till date1 has any effect on
height of liquid in the barometer=
9ill results of glycerine and water barometers differ from mercury
,he value of acceleration due to gravity, g can be measured by this method
and used in measurement of mass of earth and other astronomical data.
If both methods give different values of g, then what would be mass of
earth= It is a big question.
If e3eriments fail then it would lead to reanalysis of equation 5 -;g8
,he value of acceleration due to gravity, g varies with altitude and deth , it
can be comared with g -5>;8. ,hus value of g can be cross checked.
,he value of acceleration due to gravity varies with altitude and deth, it can
be comared with 5 -;gh. All values must be consistent.
0i1 Torricelli had made mercury barometer in 1'(( and measured ressure as 5-;g8, the
equation 5-;g8, became derivable after 1'"#. ,he height of mercury column in the barometer
is <'cm or +.<'m of mercury is estimated with 5-;g8.
0ii1 9ater is the most abundant liquid but scientists have not constructed the 9ater :arometer in
ast 6<+ years. ,he height of water column mathematically comes out to be 1+.61m
8eight of water column - 1+.61m 05>;wg1
8eight of ethyl alcohol column - 16.' m 05>;eag1
8eight of glycerin column - ".2+( m 05>;glg1
,he comarison of e3eriments related with water and glycerin is interesting, as coefficient of
viscosity of glycerin is 1+#" times more than that of water. 9hereas density of glycerin is only
1.2' times density of water. ,he role of viscosity is e3ected to be significant.
0iii1 +mportance: ;ue to intricacies of the e3erimental and theoretical status the height of
water column may not be 1+.61m 0 say it is 1+."m1, then real results will be on the hand. It
would mean the value of g 0acceleration due to gravity1 will vary 05 - ;8g1. ,hus mass of the
! - g?
will vary 0current value of mass of the earth 0!-#.@<(31+
kg1 due to variation in g . Aikewise
distances between various heavenly body and their masses will vary. ,hus simle looking
undergraduate level water barometer e3eriments are very significant. ,hese barometers are
not formed in history of science 2or comlete understanding all barometers must be formed so
that results may be drawn over a wide range. It is established in science that conclusions are
not drawn from a single observations. !any editors and scientists of /ournals have asked me
for e3erimental results, as method is okay.
,. Archimedes -rinciple: The .ldest /stablished (a
First Glimpse
%eneral ublic all over the world knew before Archimedes about the observation that a
body ulled from water, then it is lighter.
According to anecdote or legend that Archimedes enunciated the rincile, to ascertain
the urity of kings crown but there is no documentary roof for this belief. Also at that
time there was simler method to determine the density of crown.
At time of Archimedes, the unit of volume such as one cubic centimeter and one milliliter
was not defined. Also mass was not defined as we do now. ,hus measurement of
density may not be as accurate as now.
It is strange that mathematical equations were formed on the basis of Archimedes
rincile 02#+:.1 after 1@6# years of its enunciation i.e. in 1'"# when Bewton ublished
The Principia and defined acceleration due to gravity g.
Archimedes rincile imlies that uthrust 0 C-D;g1 deends uon volume of body D,
density of medium ; and acceleration due to gravity, g.
,he uthrust e3erienced by body does not deend uon the $8A54 of body.,hus
uthrust 0 C-D;g1 for bodies of same volume is same irresective of shae .
,he effect of shae of body on uthrust can be studied e3erimentally in various cases
i.e. rising, falling and floating bodies.
,he magnitude of units of mass and volume have changed time and again in the history
of science, so it is ones guess how density is measured recisely= ,hus density of
substances varied in ast. $o which value Archimedes confirmed.
0i1 %eneral ublic all over the world knew before Archimedes that a body is p"lled from ater0
then it is lighter i.e. eight decreases. Archimedes stated that EE how much weight
decreases in fluids= Archimedes stated the rincile in 2#+:. i.e. 22'# years ago.
0ii1 ,here is no documentary roof that Archimedes stated the rincile to determine the urity of
kings crown. It is an anecdote only.
0iii1 22'# Archimedes rincile simly involves determination of volume. :ut the unit of volume
01cc1 was defined in 1"<@ i.e. after 212@ years after enunciation of the rincile. The val"e of
1cc as defined in 11120 then redefined in 1203 and again changed 1245. $o volume was
not uniformly defined. ,hus Archimedes rincile is either wrong now or was in the ast.
0iv1 Bone of the original writings of Archimedes e3ist now. ,here are books which describe
works of Archimedes.
(. The Generali6ed form of Archimedes principle
First Glimpse
Archimedes stated the rincile in 2#+:. i.e. 22'# years ago. It is the oldest
established rincile in science.
Archimedes rincile has not been confirmed in comletely submerged floating
balloon e3eriments in water and other fluids= In these e3eriments only weight
and uthrust act on the balloon.
!athematical equations based uon the rincile became feasible after 1@6#
years ago i.e. in 1'"# when Bewton ublished the 5rinciia. In the book Bewton
defined Aaw of %ravitation and acceleration due to gravity, g.
,he rising 0hot air1 balloons were discovered in 1<"6 by !ontgolfier brothers.
2rom mathematical equations it is evident that the mass &as it aears in
equations i.e. mf -0DFvf1 ;w)D;a * which balloon suorts is indeendent of
shae of balloon.
,ill date in the history of science no secific e3eriments are conducted to
check effect of shae of comletely and indeendently submerged floating
balloon or bodies.
$uch e3eriments can be conducted in viscous liquid glycerin and the dense
liquid mercury 016,'++kg>m
,he generaliGed form of Archimedes rincile is C-fD;mg, where f is coefficient
of roortionality.
f takes in account the factors like shae of body, viscosity of medium etc. ,
which are not taken in account by Archimedes rincile.
0i1 !athematical equations based uon the rincile became feasible after 1@6# years ago i.e.
in 1'"< when Bewton ublished the -rincipia. In the book Bewton defined Aaw of %ravitation
and acceleration due to gravity, g. 8ow the rincile was regarded as true without mathematical
equations for 1@6< years, it is anyones guess= ,he weight, buoyant force and resultant weight
were defined. ,hus quantitative e3lanation became ossible. ,he rincile is alied in
e3laining the rising, falling and floating bodies. $uch equations became feasible 62< years
before even then resultant acceleration of bodies in fluids is not calculated, hence distance
travelled in secific time is not calculated. It is done for first time. $imilar is case of rising bodies.
0iii1 ,he critical analysis also leads to interesting results in floating bodies. :y floating bodies
0comletely submerged1 we mean , bodies float under actions of eight and "pthr"st alone.
In case of comletely submerged floating balloons or bodies
weight of body - uthrust or D;bg - D;mg or ;b -;m
,hus Archimedes rincile takes only densities 0;b , ;m1 in account but not following factors.
0a1 'hape of body : 2loating balloon may be umbrella shaed, needle like , cone H the floating
effects are same in all cases.
0b1 7iscosity of fl"id: ,he glycenine has viscosity 1+#" times that of water and density of
glycerin is 1.2' times that of water that of medium, so e3eriments can be conducted in it. ,his
effect is taken in account.
43eriments have been suggested to determine the effects of shape of body and viscosity
of medi"m.
0iv1 If the 22'# years old Archimedes rincille is generaliGed then additional coefficient of
roortionality , aears in mathematical equations. ,his coefficient takes in account the shae
of body, viscosity of medium , other factors etc.
&v) 8athematical e!"ations
Iriginal form of Archimedes rincile
C -D;g
C H uthrust , ; density , g is acceleration due to gravity
,he generaliGed form of Archimedes rincile 0 uthrust is rortional ro weight1,
C -fD;g
where f is coeficient of roortionality , it can be detrmined e3erimentally like numerous others
e3isting in hysics.
#. The -rediction .f +ndeterminate Form .f 7ol"me From Archimedes -rinciple
First Glimpse
22'# years old Archimedes rincile is undoubtedly regarded as the oldest established
At time of Archimedes mathematical equations involving g did not e3ist, so it was not
comletely analyGed mathematically by Archimedes.
4ven concets of viscosity and surface tension did not e3ist at time of Archimedes.
.onsequently when Archimedes rincile 0C -;mDg1 is mathematically analysed then
some inconsistent results are obtained. 2or e3amle the volume of body becomes
CB;42IB4; i. e D -
which is meaningless.
,hus the oldest established rincile is generaliGed for first time i.e.
when a body is wholly or artially immersed in fluid at rest then it e3eriences uthrust
and its weight decreases which is roortional to the weight of fluid dislaced.
!athematically, C - f ;mDg
9hen generaliGed Archimedes rincile, C - f ;mDg is used then e3act volume is
obtained i.e. D -D.
$ome e3eriments are required to confirm the generaliGed form of Archimedes rincile.
f is coefficient of roortionality, it deends uon factors like shae of body , coefficient
of viscosity etc. which are not taken in account by Archimedes rincile.
,he mathematical equations became ossible about 66+ years ago, when Bewton defined
acceleration due to gravity g. ,hese equations 0many more in the following discussion 1 are not
critically analyGed till date. 9hen I critically analyGed these , then inconsistent results are
0i1 ,here is eculiar rediction from Archimedes rincile which is ointed out for first time.
.onsider a floating 0comletely submerged1 balloon in water or other fluid. Cnder some
conditions the volume of medium filled in balloon 02++cc, latinum, silver, cork, etc.1
mathematically becomes
7 9 0:0
,he eq.0#.1"1 gives value of volume, D.
V -
( )
( )
m w
vD m

Bow substituting eq.0#.1@1 and eq. 0#.2+1 i.e. ;m -;w in eq.0#.1" 1
( ) ( )
( )
w w
w w w
vD V D D v V

( )
( )
w w
w w
vD vD

or Dolume of latinum, silver, cork, metal and air -
It is undefined, the fractions ,:1 0 5:2 etc are only defined 0 not 0:0. 8ence limitation.
0ii1 If we use the generaliGed form
; 9f7Dg
,hen we get
which is true. 8ence generalised form of Archimedes rincile is /ustified.
Bow substituting eq. 0#.6(1 in eq.0#.6#1 and ;m-;w we get
( ) ( )
( )
m w
w w w
D fD
fvD VD D v V f

( )
( )
D f
V D f

-V 0#.6<1
,he val ues of f can be calcul ated for body of arbitrary shae fl oati ng in the
gl ycerine 0 coef. If vi scosity for gl yceri ne is 1+#" ti mes than that of water, and
densi ty i s onl y 1.2' ti mes that of water 1.
Home Page o &e'ond Ne(ton And Archimedes
4. +s 'to#es (a Applicable for <ising =odies> -p.1,3?1@5
All bodies fall in vacuum with ma3imum acceleration g 0@."m>s
1in vacuum . According
to Archimedes rincile bodies fall with reduced acceleration in fluids.
$tokes law 01"(#1 redicts that body falls in fluids with subtle constant velocity, under
some conditions. ,his mathematical background is used in measurement of viscosity of
fluids by method of falling bodies.
,he viscous force is given by 2- kJrv- 'KJ rv -1"."#<1Jrv.
$ir %eorge %abriel $tokes &1"1@ L1@+61, Aucasian 5rofessor of !athematics did not
e3erimentally measure the value of k equal to 'K . 8e might have given it theoretically.
$tokes law is not confirmed for all materials and liquids and aarently value of k as '
-1"."#<1 is determined theoretically. ,hus its study is incomlete.
$tokes law is regarded as true for rising bodies when v is negative but conditions 0like
ostulates in falling bodies1 of alicability of the law have not been ascertained
theoretically or e3erimentally.
If e3erimental conditions of alicability are ascertained, then viscosity of fluids can
be measured by method of rising bodies.
9ithout e3eriments regarding falling and rising bodies over wide range of arameters
the basic law of fluid dynamics is incomlete.
$tokes law holds good for falling bodies under five assumtions. It is e3erimentally confirmed
by Arnold for sheres of rose metals of radii +.++2cm in water. It is used to determine the
viscosity of fluids. ,he small shere attain constant 0terminal 1 velocity due to viscous force,
2-kJrv-'KJ rv-1"."#<1J rv 0'.1(1
,he equation for terminal velocity is given by
( )
g D D r
m b

v is constant velocity, r is radius of small shere, ;b density of body , ;m density of medium , g
is acceleration due to gravity and J is coefficient of viscosity.
Be3t question is whether $tokes law holds good for rising bodies as ell . If yes, then what
are conditions it holds good > +f "nder some conditions the rising body attains constant
velocity then
v -
) ( 2
g D D r
b m

,here is no information in e3isting literature on the toic. It has to be investigated. ,he study
will throw light on the motion of rising bodies .,his chater critically analyGe the state of rising
bodies, which is not studied at all in the e3isting literature. /Aperiments m"st be cond"cted to
determine the region of validity of 'to#es la is disc"ssed. +t is basic problem in fl"id
dynamics and is incomplete.
3. (imitations of /Aisting Theories and an Alternate Theory of <ising0 Falling and
Floating =odies pp.1@@?**0
First Glimpse
8ere natural motion of bodies 0fall or rise without e3ternal influence1 is considered. ,he
bodies fall under influence of gravity.
In e3isting hysics Archimedes rincile and $tokes law are used to e3lain the motion
of rising, falling and floating bodies.
Archimedes rincile states that if ;bM;m body rises, ;bN;m body falls and if ;m-;b then
body floats. It is qualitative e3lanation only.
,he rincile does not correctly oints out the how much distance is travelled 0fallen or
risen1 by body in time t i.e. 1s, (s or @s etc.
According to Archimedes rincile bodies of aluminum 02<++kg>m
1 of mass 1mg
0 sherical in shae1 and 1+++kg 0 flat in shae 1 must fall through distance of 6.+"# m
in 1s. :ut this rediction is not confirmed yet, but regarded as true.
,he rincile only takes in account the ;m and ;b, and neglects mass, shae and angle
at which body is droed, magnitude, characteristics motion of medium and convectional
currents etc.
? 5iaGGa has observed anomalous observations to Archimedes rincile in sensitive
e3eriments, that heavy articles of gold floated over the surface of lighter medium.
$tokes law is alicable in very)2 narrow range i.e. Arnold confirmed it for bodies of
rose metal of radii +.++2cm with some accuracy, otherwise it is not valid.
,he drag force is not alicable to natural motion.
,hus an alternate theory on rising, falling and floating is develoed taking all factors in
account 0i.e. mass, shae and angle at which body is droed, magnitude,
characteristics motion of medium and convectional currents etc.1
,he newly discussed terms are 8idden ?atio, 2alling 2actor and ?ising 2actor.
0i1 If we dro a 1+kg steel ball, 1kg steel cylinder, 1mg steel sheet in water. In the
e3isting literature, there is no equation which may redict that in 1+s, how much
distances bodies will travel=
According to equations based uon Archimedes rincile, all bodies must fall equal
;I$,AB.4$ in equal interval of ,I!4. It is based uon following equations
,he resultant weight is the difference weight and uthrust &'*.
9? -9)C - 0;b);m1Dg
- 01)
1D;bg 0<.111
or g -
,hus dividing eq.0<.111 with mass of body, m -;bD,
a? - 01)
If body starts from the rest i.e. u-+
$ 9
,hus distance travelled is indeendent of mass, shae of body etc. :ut is not /ustified
e3erimentally, even in daily life observations.
0ii1 ,he same is true for rising bodies. ,hese henomena 0 distances travelled in certain
times1 are not discussed in e3isting literature. ,he mathematical equations dont e3ist in
literature, and hence has been urosely formed. ,hese equations must be
e3erimentally confirmed.
<egarding motion of bodies other prevalent concepts s"ch as visco"s force
2- ' Jrv 0<.#11
;-.;m Au
and ,chens equations are discussed. All the theories in the e3isting hysics dont
e3lain the henomena of rising and falling bodies OCAB,I,A,ID4AP. ,hese have
different alications.
0iii1 An alternate theory is develoed, taking all ossible factors in account e.g.
magnitude of medium, shae of medium, state of motion of medium, convectional
currents, viscosity of medium , surface tension of medium , fluidity of medium ,
magnitude of body, shae of body, distortion of body and angle at which body is
droed. Bew equations are formulated. All the henomena are discussed with hel of
mathematical equations. 43eriments are required to confirm them.
1. <o"te to BetonCs (as of 8otion pp.**1?*4,
First glimpse
Aristotle ut forth that there can be no motion without force or cause and effect
ercetion, but was unable to e3lain the ro/ectile motion.
5hiloonus in '
century and :uridan in 1(
century contradicted this assertion and ut
forth Imetus ,heory.
%alileo hyothesiGed a medium devoid of resistive forces.
In early 1<
century %alileo reached the law of Inertia that body maintains its uniform
motion even without force if once set in motion. Aarently, it was /ust oosite to
Aristotles assertion and :uridan>5hiloonus Imetus ,heory.
9hereas Aristotle, 5hiloonus and :uridan had maintained that force or imetus
0 energy imarted1 is required for motionQ they considered medium with resistive forces.
In 1'"< Bewton re)stated %alileos law of inertia and gave the laws of motion, in treatise
the Principia.
%alileos law of inertia and Bewton first law of motion imly that as long as resistive
forces 0atmosheric, frictional, and gravitational etc.1 are absent body moves with
uniform velocity and stos when resistive forces start.
It would be better if scientists formulate, a comrehensive law for ractical system
0 having resistive forces1 and this law must reduce to ideal cases 0 devoid of resistive
forces1, such as %alileos law of inertia.
0i1 Irigin of Bewtons laws lies in doctrines of Aristotle 0 6"6)6221, 5hiloonus 0#2+)'++ 1 ,
:uridan 0012@#)16'+1 and %alileo 01#'()1'(2 1. Bewton 01'(2)1#2<1 based his first law on
the e3isting basis. ,he various asects are discussed with details.
,he most imortant significance of the chater is that
In the form of Bewtons second law is taught is schools 02-ma1 all over the world , was not
given by Bewton. It was given by Aeonhard 4ular in 1@#+.
;efinition of second law
R,he alteration of motion is ever roortional to the motive force imressSdQ and is made in the
direction of the right line in which that force is imressSd.T
Bewton has defined motion or Absolute motion at age 1+ of the -rincipia0 as velocity.
:ody is in motion if vM+ , alteration - simle difference
It means 2 -0v)u1 not 2-m 0v)u1>t or 2 -ma , 2 force , m mass and a is acceleration
0i1 In 1<1' Uacob 8ermann in his book R5horonomiaT, 0 even now it is in AA,IB1 , gave equation
dc - p dt, where stands for RceleritasT meaning seed, and stands for RotentiaT, meaning
2orce - rate of change of seed, 0 it is acceleration 1
It is regarded as 2-ma but it is definitely not , as it is acceleration but called force 0otentia in
Aatin1. Bewtons 5rinciia used RceleritasT as seed.
0ii1 !omentum was defined in U UenningSs Miscellanea in 1<21 as OVD 0mass 3 velocity1
Bewton ignored it when ublished last edition of the 5rinciia in 1<2'
0iii1 It must be noted that term imetus 0similar to momentum1 was defined by Uean :uridan
Imetus - 9eight 3 velocity 0mass 3 velocity1 E.. momentum
0vi1 2urther in two significant aers entitled Recherches sur le mouvement des corps clestes
en gnral and then in Dcouverte dun nouveau principe de Mcanique .
4uler used an e3trinsic references frames 0a system of three orthogonal .artesian a3es1 and
formulated the second law of motion in this wayH
or 5 -
x d
M , O -
y d
M , ? -
z d
where M is the mass and P, ", and R the comonents of the force on the
a3is 0the coefficient 2 deended on the unit of measure1.
,hus above equations reresent 2-ma - m
s d
, which is taught now as mathematical form of
Bewtons $econd law of !otion.
4CA4?, Aeonhard Recherches sur le mouvement des corps clestes en gnral Mmoires de
lacadmie des sciences de $erlin 6, @6)1(6 or %pera ser. 2, vol. 2#, 1 L (( 01<(<1.
4CA4?, Aeonhard 01<#+1 R;Wcouverte dun nouveau rincile de !WcaniqueT, Mm., ', 1"#)
21< or %pera, ser. 2, vol. #, "1 L 1+", 01<#+1.
$o it is confirmed that Bewton did not derive 2-ma it was derived by Aeonhard 4ular in 1<#+.
&vii) Beton$s second la & as given by /"lar) predicts ;BD/F+B/D 8A''
$econd law of motion 02-ma 1 reduces to 2irst Aaw of !otion 0 body kees state of rest or
uniform velocity, a -+ when no force acts on body, 2-+1 under the condition when no force
acts on system i.e. 2 -+ and a-+
Cnder this condition inertial mass is
m -2>a - +>+
which is undefined. 4ular should have discussed this asect. ,here can be no limitation bigger
than this. It is unnoticed by scientific community.
@. /Aperimental Confirmations of /!"ations of Conservation (as in /lastic
,he equations based on elastic collisions take in account directly mass, but not other
characteristics of bodies and e3erimental set u.
,he imortant thing is to e3erimentally confirm equations.
If a ro/ectile is very)2 heavy than target, then after collision target must move with
double velocity.
9hen two bodies of equal masses collide, then they e3change their velocities.
If the equations of conservation of momentum and kinetic energy are written but not
e3erimentally confirmed, then /ob is half done.
It is stressed that at macroscoic level the conditions under which these equations hold
good must be determined.
It can be e3erimentally checked u to which e3tent comosition of bodies and resistive
forces of the system lay significant role in collisions.
,he study of elastic collisions 0conservation of momentum and kinetic energy1 is
incomlete if equations are not e3erimentally verified.
!athematical equations based on elastic collisions redict that velocity of ro/ectile and
target after collisions is uniform i.e. acceleration is Gero.
,he conditions under which the conservation laws hold good, need to be established.
0i1 Aet a shell of mass +.+1kg is fired from the gun of mass 2#kg. If muGGle velocity of the shell
is 2++ ms
, what is recoil seed of gun=
!athematically seed of gun turns out to be )"cm>s . It can be determined under which
conditions the gun recoils with velocity "cm>s.
9e have equation for one dimensional elastic collisions
Ir v1 -
( )
( )
2 1
2 2 1 2 1
u M u M M
v2 -
( )
2 1
1 1 2 1 2
u M u M M
,he equations have various sub)cases. ,he e3erimental set u is described to confirm above
equations e3erimentally.
10. /lastic Collisions in .ne Dimension and BetonCs Third (a of 8otion
+n the -rincipia
First Glimpse
Bewton quoted three laws of motion in the 5rinciia very briefly.
,hese laws are quoted at age nos. 1@)2+ of the first 4nglish translation of The
Principia by Andrew !ott in 1<2@.
,he third law of motion is understood qualitatively at macroscoic level in standard
,he third law of motion can be /ustified on the basis of equations based uon elastic
collisions, esecially when target is very)2 heavy than ro/ectile.
,he real beauty of science is to e3erimentally confirm the mathematical equations.
In view of discussion it is concluded that
R,o every action there is reaction but may or may be equal deending uon
characteristics of the system.T
Lex III: &ctioni contrariam semper et 'qualem esse reactionem( sive corporum duorum
actiones in se mutuo semper esse 'quales et in partes contrarias dirigi.
9hen translated to 4nglish
(a +++: ,o every action there is always oosed an equal reactionH or the actions of two bodies
uon each other are always equal, and directed to contrary arts.
Aimitations of 6
law of motion 0striking of ball on the wall1.
Third (a: It is unconditional, comletely independent of characteristics of interacting
bodies i.e. it acts equally for rubber ball, cloth ball, fle3ible ball, mud ball etc.
If these balls are hit on concrete ball with same force 0same action1, then must rebound to same
e3tent. :ut it does not haen, so action and reaction are not equal.
Table + Comparison of action and reaction on r"bber and cloth balls 0soft, softer, fle3ible,
rigid or tyical1 when hit on the wall.
$r. Bo :odies Action ?eaction 6
Aaw of !otion
1 ?ubber ball 2-2B
Action -)?eaction
2 .loth ball
0soft, softer, fle3ible,
rigid or tyical1
Action )?eaction

Home Page o )&e'ond Ne(ton And Archimedes*
Author A/ay $harma
/mail aDay.p! 8ob. 0021 25115 @0122