|
GR9277 #100
|
|
|
|
|
Alternate Solutions |
| There are no Alternate Solutions for this problem. Be the first to post one! |
|
|
Comments |
Albert 2009-11-05 04:38:54 | Alternate solution:
No center of mass needed, no torque, no directions, nothing! I solve it by simply taking the ratio of the masses with the lengths of the rod on either side of the fulcrum. And here's how:
On one side you have and other side has . The rod weighs , so I divide in half and give both weights each. And now they weigh and .
Once reached so far, just put 'em up in ratio and get it,
)
comes out , which is of course further from the center.
The god-damned technique works every freakin' time!
Just make sure you set the ratio to "more mass: lesser length".
|  | matonski 2009-03-24 01:57:48 | I just put the origin at the center and found the center of mass. COM =
kroner 2009-09-29 14:09:00 |
I think it's safe to say that matonski wins.
|
adjwilley 2009-11-04 10:40:16 |
Beautiful.
|
|  | vsravani 2008-11-01 10:51:15 | why is minus sign taken in the equation for 40kg mass
20gd+20gq-40gx=0?
elzoido238 2008-11-06 11:37:44 |
There is a negative sign for the torque due to the 40 kg mass because its contribution to the torque is in the opposite direction of the torques arising from the 20 kg mass and the mass of the rod.
|
|  | Andresito 2006-03-30 13:01:46 | @astro_allison, thank you for the alternative. |  | astro_allison 2005-11-26 23:32:09 | the term "10 " doesn't make sense to me...
I solved it this way:
if is the distance from the center of mass to the fulcrum,
 = 40(5-d))
solving, you get 
for some reason when I solved it with the term in your equation, I got 
yosun 2005-11-27 02:28:28 |
astro_allison: thanks for the typo-alert; it has been fixed. ( should be ... note that the first g is a q.) also, thanks for the alternate solution.
|
gotfork 2008-10-17 11:31:32 |
I'm a bit confused, where does the 20d come from?
|
gotfork 2008-10-17 12:23:09 |
Whoops, just realized the rod has a mass.
|
|  |
|
|
|
|
|