- 398
- 235
I already showed that using it gives different result also explained why. Explanation wasn't even necessary as it just gives a lower result than it should:Again, how are you saying something so wrong about something as basic as center of mass.
Here its definition: "The center of mass is the unique point at the center of a distribution of mass in space that has the property that the weighted position vectors relative to this point sum to zero.".
It is all about distribution. Its position changes depending on the shape of the object.
But this really turned into me trying to explain basic concepts.
Look, just google how to calculate kinetic energy in circular motion and look at the results. Every single one will use classic KE formula with center of mass.
I gave 3 sources and you are still using your faulty example as a reason to dismiss them. I really don't want to argue with you any longer.
Also I didn't say that mass center doesn't account for mass distribution, just linear Ke formula doesn't do this. It treats object as point object at its mass center which is the reason why you can't use it for rotational motion.for example rotating rod around its end will be mv²/8 for linear KE and mv²/6 for rotational.(v here is speed of its rotating end)
If you think that it does, then you should also accept that a rod spinning around its center has 0 KE
Last edited: