For a torque-free symmetric top, the Inertia tensor has an inverse $I^{-1}$, and $L=I\omega$. Which implies that $\omega=I^{-1}L$. But since $I, L$ are constants, $\vec\omega$ is a constant. However, $\vec\omega$ precesses. Why is there this paradox in argument?
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
6
The moment of inertia tensor is not constant in the external reference frame (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precession#Torque-free )
-
1$\begingroup$ The point being, that as the top moves, it's distribution of mass changes, so $I$ changes. $\endgroup$ Nov 29, 2013 at 22:37
-
$\begingroup$ But the position of the masses with respect to the principal axes and the center of mass remains the same, doesn't it? So, as long as the 'rigid' body remains rigid, how can $I$ change? $\endgroup$ Nov 30, 2013 at 1:27
-
$\begingroup$ But the principal axes move in the external frame of reference due to rotation. $\endgroup$ Nov 30, 2013 at 1:42
-
1$\begingroup$ @Artemisia: The laws of dynamics of a rigid body can be written either in an inertial frame of reference, or in a rotating frame of reference (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/… ). In the inertial frame of reference, one uses the moment of inertia tensor in the inertial frame of reference, which is not constant, but angular momentum is preserved. In the rotating frame of reference, one uses the moment of inertia tensor in the rotating frame of reference, which is constant, but angular momentum is not preserved. $\endgroup$ Nov 30, 2013 at 3:10
-
1$\begingroup$ @Artemisia To convince you further that akhmeteli is right see physics.stackexchange.com/a/89304/19976 and lionelbrits's answer to the same question. $\endgroup$ Dec 9, 2013 at 6:09