Chapter 1: Physics - The Foundation of Science
Chapter 1: Physics - The Foundation of Science
Chapter 1: Physics - The Foundation of Science
Examples of this sort, together with the unsuccessful attempts to discover any
motion of the earth relatively to the light medium suggest that the phenomena
of electromagnetism as well as mechanics possess no properties corresponding to
the idea of absolute rest. They suggest rather that, the same laws of
electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the
equations of mechanics hold good. We will raise this conjecture to the status of
a postulate, and also introduce another postulate, , namely that light is always
propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the
state of motion of the emitting body.
When we observe and measure phenomena in the world, we try to assign numbers to the
physical quantities with as much accuracy as we can possibly obtain from our measuring
equipment. For example, we may want to determine the speed of light, which we can
calculate by dividing the distance a known ray of light propagates over its travel time,
distance
speed of light = . (1.1.1)
time
In 1983 the General Conference on Weights and Measures defined the speed of
light to be
This number was chosen to correspond to the most accurately measured value of
the speed of light and is well within the experimental uncertainty.
The three quantities time, length, and the speed of light are directly
intertwined. Which quantities should we consider as base and which ones as derived
from the base quantities? For example, are length and time base quantities while speed is
a derived quantity?
This question is answered by convention. The basic system of units used
throughout science and technology today is the internationally accepted Systme
International (SI). It consists of seven base quantities and their corresponding base units:
1
A. Einstein, Ann. Physik, 17, 891 (1905); translated by W. Perrett and G.B. Jeffrey, 19223, in The
Principle of Relativity, Dover, New York.
1
Mechanics is based on just the first three of these quantities, the MKS or meter-
kilogram-second system. An alternative metric system to this, still widely used, is the so-
called CGS system (centimeter-gram-second). So far as distance and time measurements
are concerned, there is also wide use of British Imperial units (especially in the USA)
based on the foot (ft), the mile (mi), etc., as units of length, and also making use of the
minute, hour, day and year as units of time.
We shall refer to the dimension of the base quantity by the quantity itself, for example
dim length ! length ! L, dim mass ! mass ! M, dim time ! time ! T. (1.2.1)
Absolute true and mathematical time, of itself and from its own nature,
flows equably without relation to anything external, and by another name
is called duration: relative, apparent, and common time, is some sensible
and external (whether accurate or unequable) measure of duration by
means of motion, which is commonly used instead of true time; such as an
hour, a day, a month, a year. 2.
2
Isaac Newton. Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. Translated by Andrew Motte (1729).
Revised by Florian Cajori. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1934. p. 6.
2
The second is the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation
corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the
ground state of the cesium 133 atom.
The meter was originally defined as 1/10,000,000 of the arc from the Equator to
the North Pole along the meridian passing through Paris. To aid in calibration and ease of
comparison, the meter was redefined in terms of a length scale etched into a platinum bar
preserved near Paris. Once laser light was engineered, the meter was redefined by the
17th Confrence Gnrale des Poids et Msures (CGPM) in 1983 to be a certain number
of wavelengths of a particular monochromatic laser beam.
The metre is the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time
interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.
Solution: Using the relationship distance = (speed of light) ! (time) , one light year
corresponds to a distance. Since the speed of light is given in terms of meters per second,
we need to know how many seconds are in a year. We can accomplish this by converting
units. We know that
! 24 hours $ ! 60 min $ ! 60 s $
(
1 year = 365.25 day #)
" 1 day &% #" 1 hour &% #" 1 min &%
= 31,557,600 s . (1.4.1)
! 299,792,458 m $ ! 31,557,600 s $
1 ly = #
" 1s &
%"# 1 yr &
%
( )
1 yr = 9.461 ' 1015 m . (1.4.2)
The distance to the nearest star, Alpha Centauri, is three light years.
A standard astronomical unit is the parsec. One parsec is the distance at which
there is one arcsecond = 1/3600 degree angular separation between two objects that are
separated by the distance of one astronomical unit, 1AU = 1.50 !1011 m , which is the
3
mean distance between the earth and sun. One astronomical unit is roughly equivalent to
eight light minutes, 1AU = 8.3l-min One parsec is equal to 3.26 light years, where one
light year is the distance that light travels in one earth year, 1pc = 3.26ly = 2.06 !105 AU
where 1ly = 9.46 !1015 m .
1.5 Mass
The unit of mass, the kilogram (kg), remains the only base unit in the
International System of Units (SI) that is still defined in terms of a physical artifact,
known as the International Prototype of the Standard Kilogram. The prototype was
made in 1879 by George Matthey (of Johnson Matthey) in the form of a cylinder, 39 mm
high and 39 mm in diameter, consisting of an alloy of 90 % platinum and 10 % iridium.
The international prototype is kept at the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures
(BIPM) at Sevres, France under conditions specified by the 1st Confrence Gnrale des
Poids et Msures (CGPM) in 1889 when it sanctioned the prototype and declared This
prototype shall henceforth be considered to be the unit of mass. It is stored at
atmospheric pressure in a specially designed triple bell-jar. The prototype is kept in a
vault with six official copies.
The 3rd CGPM (1901), in a declaration intended to end the ambiguity in popular usage
concerning the word weight confirmed that:
The kilogram is the unit of mass; it is equal to the mass of the international
prototype of the kilogram.
4
Figure 1.2 Stainless steel one-kilogram standard and traveling case
There is a stainless steel one-kilogram standard that can travel for comparisons. In
practice it is more common to quote a conventional mass value (or weight-in-air, as
measured with the effect of buoyancy), than the standard mass. Standard mass is
normally only used in specialized measurements wherever suitable copies of the
prototype are stored.
Determine the type of shape and dimensions of the platinum-iridium prototype kilogram
such that it has the smallest surface area for a given volume. You may want to consider
the following questions:
1) Is there any reason that the surface area of the standard could be important?
3) What shape (that is, sphere, cube, right cylinder, parallelepiped, etc.) has the
smallest surface area for a given volume?
5
Corrosion would affect the mass through chemical reaction; platinum and iridium were
chosen for the standards composition as they resist corrosion.
To further minimize corrosion, the shape should be chosen to have the least surface area.
Ideally, this would be a sphere, but as spheres roll easily they become impractical,
whereas cylinders have flat surfaces which prevent this. The volume for a cylinder or
radius r and height h is a constant and given by
V = ! r 2h . (1.5.2)
2V
A = 2! r 2 + 2! rh = 2! r 2 + . (1.5.3)
r
To find the smallest surface area, minimize the area with respect to the radius
dA 2V
= 4! r " 2 = 0 . (1.5.4)
dr r
V ! r 2h
r3 = = . (1.5.5)
2! 2!
h
r= . (1.5.6)
2
13 13
"V % " 46.38 cm 3 %
r=$ ' =$ ' ( 1.95 cm . (1.5.7)
# 2! & # 2! &
Since the prototype kilogram is an artifact, there are some intrinsic problems associated
with its use as a standard. It may be damaged, or destroyed. The prototype gains atoms
due to environment wear and cleaning, at a rate of change of mass corresponding to
approximately 1 g / year ( 1 g ! 1microgram ! 1 " 10-6 g ).
6
Several new approaches to defining the SI unit of mass (kg) are currently being
explored. One possibility is to define the kilogram as a fixed number of atoms of a
particular substance, thus relating the kilogram to an atomic mass. Silicon is a good
candidate for this approach because it can be grown as a large single crystal, in a very
pure form.
A given standard unit cell of silicon has a volume V0 and contains N 0 atoms. The
number of molecules in a given mole of substance is given by Avogadros constant
N A = 6.0221415 ! 1023 mole-1 . The molar mass of silicon is given by M molar . Find the
mass m of a volume V in terms of V0 , N 0 , V , M molar , and N A .
Solution: The mass m0 of the unit cell is the density ! of silicon cell multiplied by the
volume of the cell V0 ,
m0 = !V0 . (1.5.8)
The number of moles in the unit cell is the total mass, m0 , of the cell, divided by the
molar mass M molar ,
The number of atoms in the unit cell is the number of moles n0 times the Avogadro
constant, N A ,
! V0 N A
N 0 = n0 N A = (1.5.10)
M molar
The density of the crystal is related to the mass m of the crystal divided by the volume V
of the crystal,
! = m/V (1.5.11)
mV0 N A
N0 = (1.5.12)
VM molar
7
So the mass of the crystal is
M molar V
m= N (1.5.13)
N A V0 0
The molar mass, unit cell volume and volume of the crystal can all be measured directly.
Notice that M molar / N A is the mass of a single atom, and (V / V0 )N 0 is the number of
atoms in the volume. This approach is therefore reduced to the problem of measuring the
Avogadro constant, N A , with a relative uncertainty of 1 part in 108, which is equivalent
to the uncertainty in the present definition of the kilogram.
Radians
sin(! ) = y / r , (1.6.1)
cos(! ) = x / r , (1.6.2)
tan(! ) = y / x (1.6.3)
It is very important to become familiar with using the measure of the angle !
itself as expressed in radians [rad]. Let ! be the angle between two straight lines OX
and OP . If we draw a circle of any radius r centered at O , the lines OP and OX cut
the circle at the points A and B where OA = OB = r . If the length of the arc AB is s ,
the radian measure of ! is given by
8
! = s/r,
and is the same for circles of all radii centered at O -- just as the ratios y / r and y / x
are the same for all right triangles with the angle ! at O . As ! approaches 360! , s
approaches the complete circumference 2! r of the circle, so that 360! = 2! rad .
Lets compare the behavior of sin(! ) , tan(! ) and ! itself for small angles. One
can see from the diagram that s / r > y / r . It is less obvious that y / x > ! . It is very
instructive to plot sin(! ) , tan(! ) , and ! as functions of ! [rad] between 0 and ! / 2
on the same graph (see Figure 1.4).
For small ! , the values of all three functions are almost equal. But how small is
small? An acceptable condition is for ! << 1 in radians. We can show this with a few
examples.
Since 360! = 2! rad , 57.3! = 1 rad , so an angle 6! ! (6! )(2" rad / 360o ) ! 0.1 rad when
expressed in radians. Use your pocket calculator to verify the following values of sin(! )
and tan ! to 4-digit accuracy for ! " 0.1rad :
! [rad] = 0.1000
sin(! ) = 0.0998
tan(! ) = 0.1003.
9
So the spread of values in this case is less than 0.3% . Again using your calculator, fill
in the blanks below for ! = 15! , which is about equal to 0.25 rad :
! [rad] = 0.2618
sin(! ) =
tan(! ) = .
can be used almost interchangeably, within some small percentage error. This is the
basis of many useful approximations in physics calculations.
Steradians
The steradian (sr) is the unit of solid angle that, having its vertex in the center of a sphere,
cuts off an area of the surface of the sphere equal to that of a square with sides of length
equal to the radius of the sphere. The conventional symbol for steradian measure is !
the uppercase greek Omega. The total solid angle !sphere of a sphere is then found by
dividing the surface area of the sphere by the square of the radius,
Note that this result is independent of the radius of the sphere. Note also that it
was implied that the solid angle was measured from the center of the sphere (the radius r
is constant). It turns out that the above result does not depend on the position of the
vertex as long as the vertex is inside the sphere.
Many physical quantities are derived from the base quantities by set of algebraic relations
defining the physical relation between these quantities. The dimension of the derived
quantity is written as a power of the dimensions of the base quantitites,
10
For example velocity is a derived quantity and the dimension is given by the
relationship
(mass)(dim velocity)
dim force = . (1.7.2)
(time)
where M ! mass .We could express force in terms of mass, length, and time by the
relationship
(mass)(length)
dim force = 2
= M ! L ! T-2 . (1.7.3)
(time)
(mass)(length)2
dim kineticenergy = 2
= M ! L2 ! T-2 (1.7.5)
(time)
(mass)(length)2
dim work = = M ! L2 ! T-2 (1.7.7)
(time)2
Power is defined to be the rate of change in time of work so the dimensions are
11
In Table 1.1 we include the derived dimensions of some common mechanical
quantities in terms of mass, length, and time.
Dimensional Analysis
There are many phenomena in nature that can be explained by simple relationships
between the observed phenomena.
Consider a simple pendulum consisting of a massive bob suspended from a fixed point by
a string. Let Tperiod denote the time (period of the pendulum) that it takes the bob to
complete one cycle of oscillation. How does the period of the simple pendulum depend
on the quantities that define the pendulum and the quantities that determine the motion?
12
Solution:
What possible quantities are involved? The length of the pendulum l , the mass of the
pendulum bob m , the gravitational acceleration g , and the angular amplitude of the bob
! 0 are all possible quantities that may enter into a relationship for the period of the
swing. Have we included every possible quantity? We can never be sure but lets first
work with this set and if we need more than we will have to think harder!
(
Tperiod = f l, m, g,! 0 ) (1.7.9)
We first make a list of the dimensions of our quantities as shown in Table 1.2. Choose
the set: mass, length, and time, to use as the base dimensions.
Table 1.2 Dimensions of quantities that may describe the period of pendulum
Our first observation is that the mass of the bob cannot enter into our relationship,
as our final quantity has no dimensions of mass and no other quantity can remove the
dimension of the pendulum mass. Lets focus on the length of the string and the
gravitational acceleration. In order to eliminate length, these quantities must divide each
other in the above expression for Tperiod must divide each other. If we choose the
combination l / g , the dimensions are
length
dim[l / g] = 2
= (time)2 (1.7.10)
length/(time)
It appears that the time of swing is proportional to the square root of this ratio. We have
an argument that works for our choice of constants, which depend on the units we choose
for our fundamental quantities. Thus we have a candidate formula
1/ 2
!l$
Tperiod !# & (1.7.11)
" g%
13
(in the above expression, the symbol ! represents a proportionality, not an
approximation).
1/ 2
"l%
Tperiod ()
=y ! $ '
# g&
(1.7.12)
( )
We shall discover later on that y ! 0 is nearly independent of the angular amplitude ! 0
( )
for very small amplitudes and is equal to y ! 0 = 2" ,
1/ 2
"l%
Tperiod = 2! $ ' (1.7.13)
# g&
Significant Figures
2. If there is no decimal place, the rightmost nonzero digit is the least significant
digit.
3. If there is a decimal point then the right most digit is the least significant digit
even if it is a zero.
4. All digits between the least and most significant digits are counted as significant
digits.
When reporting the results of an experiment, the number of significant digits used
in reporting the result is the number of digits needed to state the result of that
measurement (or a calculation based on that measurement) without any loss of precision.
3
Philip R Bevington and D. Keith Robinson, Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences,
2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, 1992.
14
There are exceptions to these rules, so you may want to carry around one extra
significant digit until you report your result. For example if you multiply 2 ! 0.56 = 1.12 ,
not 1.1 .
There is some ambiguity about the number of significant figure when the
rightmost digit is 0, for example 1050, with no terminal decimal point. This has only
three significant digits. If all the digits are significant the number should be written as
1050., with a terminal decimal point. To avoid this ambiguity it is wiser to use scientific
notation.
Scientific Notation
Careless use of significant digits can be easily avoided by the use of decimal notation
times the appropriate power of ten for the number. Then all the significant digits are
manifestly evident in the decimal number. So the number 1050 = 1.05 ! 103 while the
number 1050. = 1.050 ! 103 .
Rounding
To round off a number by eliminating insignificant digits we have three rules. For
practical purposes, rounding will be done automatically by a calculator or computer, and
all we need do is set the desired number of significant figures for whichever tool is used.
1. If the fraction is greater than 1/2, increment the new least significant digit.
3. If the fraction equals 1/2, increment the least significant digit only if it is odd.
The reason for Rule 3 is that a fractional value of 1/2 may result from a previous
rounding up of a fraction that was slightly less than 1/2 or a rounding down of a fraction
that was slightly greater than 1/2. For example, 1.249 and 1.251 both round to three
significant digits 1.25. If we were to round again to two significant digits, both would
yield the same value, either 1.2 or 1.3 depending on our convention in Rule 3. Choosing
to round up if the resulting last digit is odd and to round down if the resulting last digit is
even reduces the systematic errors that would otherwise be introduced into the average of
a group of such numbers.
15
kinematic problems with constant acceleration, etc. In most introductory university
courses, improving problem solving relies on three things:
To improve your problem solving ability in a course, the most essential change of
attitude is to focus more on the process of solution rather than on obtaining the answer.
For homework problems there is frequently a simple way to obtain the answer, often
involving some specific insight. This will quickly get you the answer, but you will not
build schema that will help solve related problems further down the road. Moreover, if
you rely on insight, when you get stuck on a problem, youre stuck with no plan or
fallback position. At MIT you will see very few exam problems that are exactly the same
as problems you have seen before, but most will use the same schema.
A great many physics textbook authors (e.g. Young and Freedman, Knight, Halliday,
Resnick and Cartwright) recommend overall problem solving strategies. These are
typically four-step procedures that descend from George Polyas influential book, How to
Solve It, on problem solving4. Here are his four steps:
What is the problem asking? What are the given conditions and assumptions?
What domain of knowledge is involved? What is to be found and how is this
determined or constrained by the given conditions?
4
G. Polya, How to Solve It, 2nd ed., Princeton University Press, 1957.
16
uniformly distributed along its length, the car is assumed to have constant
acceleration or constant power (obviously not true when it shifts gears), etc.
Become sensitive to information that is implicitly assumed (Presence of
gravity? No friction? That the collision is of short duration relative to the
timescale of the subsequent motion? ).
Advice: Write your own representation of the problems stated data; redraw
the picture with your labeling and comments. Get the problem into your
brain! Go systematically down the list of topics in the course or for that week
if you are stuck.
In Physics, exploit the freedoms you have: use a particular type of coordinate
system (e.g. polar) to simplify the problem, pick the orientation of a
coordinate system to get the unknowns in one equation only (e.g. only the x -
direction), pick the position of the origin to eliminate torques from forces you
dont know, pick a system so that an unknown force acts entirely within it and
hence does not change the systems momentum Given that the problem
involves some particular thing (constant acceleration, momentum) think over
all the equations that involve this concept.
Can you see that the answer is correct now that you have it often simply by
retrospective inspection? Can you solve it a different way? Is the problem
17
equivalent to one youve solved before if the variables have some specific
values?
Review the schema of your solution: Review and try to remember the
outline of the solution what is the model, the physical approximations, the
concepts needed, and any tricky math manipulation.
Counting is the first mathematical skill we learn. We came to use this skill by
distinguishing elements into groups of similar objects, but we run into problems when our
desired objects are not easily identified, or there are too many to count.
Rather than spending a huge amount of effort to attempt an exact count, we can
try to estimate the number of objects in a collection. For example, we can try to estimate
the total number of grains of sand contained in a bucket of sand. Since we can see
individual grains of sand, we expect the number to be very large but finite. Sometimes we
can try to estimate a number which we are fairly sure but not certain is finite, such as the
number of particles in the universe (See Chapter 20).
We can also assign numbers to quantities that carry dimensions, such as mass,
length, time, or charge, which may be difficult to measure exactly. We may be interested
in estimating the mass of the air inside a room, or the length of telephone wire in the
United States, or the amount of time that we have slept in our lives, or the number of
electrons inside our body. So we choose some set of units, such as kilograms, miles,
hours, and coulombs, and then we can attempt to estimate the number with respect to our
standard quantity.
18
close mean? Once again, this depends on what quantities we are estimating. If we are
describing a quantity that has a very large number associated with it, then an estimate
within an order of magnitude should be satisfactory. The number of molecules in a breath
of air is close to 1022 ; an estimate anywhere between 1021 and 1023 molecules is close
enough. If we are trying to win a contest by estimating the number of marbles in a glass
container, we cannot be so imprecise; we must hope that our estimate is within 1% of the
real quantity.
These types of estimations are called Fermi Problems. The technique is named
after the physicist Enrico Fermi, who was famous for making these sorts of back of the
envelope calculations.
Estimating is a skill that improves with practice. Here are two guiding principles that may
help you get started.
(1) You must identify a set of quantities that can be estimated or calculated.
(2) You must establish an approximate or exact relationship between these quantities
and the quantity to be estimated in the problem.
Suppose you want to line pennies up, diameter to diameter, until the total length is
1 kilometer . How many pennies will you need? How accurate is this estimation?
Solution: The first step is to consider what type of quantity is being estimated. In this
example we are estimating a dimensionless scalar quantity, the number of pennies. We
can now give a precise relationship for the number of pennies needed to mark off 1
kilometer
totaldistance
# of pennies = . (1.10.1)
diameter of penny
19
We can estimate a penny to be approximately 2 centimeters wide. Therefore the number
of pennies is
totaldistance (1 km)
# of pennies= = = 5 ! 104 pennies .(1.10.2)
length of a penny (2 cm)(1 km / 105 cm)
How accurate is this estimation? If you measure the size of a penny, you will find out that
the width is 1.9 cm , so our estimate was accurate to within 5%. This accuracy was
fortuitous. Suppose we estimated the length of a penny to be 1 cm. Then our estimate for
the total number of pennies would be within a factor of 2, a margin of error we can live
with for this type of problem.
Example: Estimate the total mass of all the water in the earth's oceans.
One of the hardest aspects of estimation problems is to decide which relationship applies.
One way to check your work is to check dimensions. Density has dimensions of
mass/volume, so our relationship is
!
mass $
( mass ) = #" volume
ocean &% ( volume ). ocean
(1.10.4)
The density of fresh water is !water = 1.0 g " cm #3 ; the density of seawater is slightly
higher, but the difference wont matter for this estimate. You could estimate this density
by envisioning how much mass is contained in a one-liter bottle of water. (The density of
water is a point of reference for all density problems. Suppose we need to estimate the
density of iron. If we compare iron to water, we estimate that iron is 5 to 10 times denser
than water. The actual density of iron is !iron = 7.8 g " cm -3 ).
Since there is no precise relationship, estimating the volume of water in the oceans is
much harder. Lets model the volume occupied by the oceans as if they completely cover
the earth, forming a spherical shell (Figure 1.5, which is decidedly not to scale). The
volume of a spherical shell of radius Rearth and thickness d is
20
(
volumeshell ! 4 Rearth
2
)
d , (1.10.5)
where Rearth is the radius of the earth and d is the average depth of the ocean.
We first estimate that the oceans cover about 75% of the surface of the earth. So the
volume of the oceans is
( )(
volume ocean ! 0.75 4" Rearth
2
d . ) (1.10.6)
We therefore have two more quantities to estimate, the average depth of the ocean, which
we can estimate the order of magnitude as d ! 1km , and the radius of the earth, which is
approximately Rearth ! 6 " 103 km . (The quantity that you may remember is the
circumference of the earth, about 25,000 miles . Historically the circumference of the
earth was defined to be 4 ! 107 m ). The radius Rearth and the circumference s are exactly
related by
s = 2! Rearth . (1.10.7)
Thus
Rearth =
s
=
( )(
2.5 " 104 mi 1.6 km # mi-1 )
= 6.4 " 103 km (1.10.8)
2! 2!
We will use Rearth ! 6 " 103 km ; additional accuracy is not necessary for this problem,
since the ocean depth estimate is clearly less accurate. In fact, the factor of 75% is not
needed, but included more or less from habit.
21
( )(
(mass)ocean =(density)water (volume)ocean ! "water 0.75 4# Rearth
2
)
d , (1.10.9)
22
23