I know some would like to blame the concepts of angular momentum on Newton.

Newton was 100% mv, to then tie any old length of string to this mv and call the momentum mvr, would be beyond bizarre. Also he could not have calculated g if momentum, for one particular object, were any number in the universe.

For Newton a 10 kg pendulum bob moving 4 m/sec, at the down swing, would have 40 units of momentum. It would have had 40 units if the bob was in a 1 m, 5m or 100 m pendulum. No it would not have had 40, 200 and 4000 units. No you can not blame angular momentum on Newton.

So if it was not Kepler or Newton; then who is to blame for these worthless concepts.

I am not denying that rotational motion can expressed with rotational concepts: but L; mr² * linear velocity / r: has one too many r's.

do you refer to this page ?


https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/395729/angular-momentum-conservation-vs-keplers-law


again, what type of camera do you have ?


Mike

One was:     A Historical Discussion of Angular Momentum and its Euler Equation:

Sony SteadyShot: it came with good evaluative software. It was used to make all the videos on YouTube under Delburt Phend

Katoe01 question: Do you have a practical setup to proof that this 10kg to 1 kg momentum-transfer can be done in Translational-Mode ?

The 10 kg moving 1 m/sec can accelerate a wheel that then gives all the linear Newtonian momentum (as in the cylinder and spheres) to the one kg that can then be released in any direction. You start linear and you end linear; there is rule that you must stay linear.

Did those (that have an angular momentum for objects moving in a straight line) convince you of an angular 'boggy man' that steals the motion?

Delburt,


"For Newton a 10 kg pendulum bob moving 4 m/sec, at the down swing, would have 40 units of momentum. It would have had 40 units if the bob was in a 1 m, 5m or 100 m pendulum."
[size=78%]
[/size]
of course it would have 40 units of momentum however in order to reach the same velocity ( 4m/s) you need to lift the pendulum-bob to different hights for different r.


"Do you have a practical setup to proof that this 10kg to 1 kg momentum-transfer can be done in Translational-Mode ?"


No, I dont.I thought I found one but upon closer analysis yesterday I realized that it does not work.I thought it would be possible to store momentum
of a falling mass in a spring which then is blocked at the dead bottom point but there is no practical mechanical solution to make this work.


My gut-feeling tells me that the 10kg bob will not stop ( v=0 m/s) because the time of contact is just a very short moment in time ( less then 0.1 s ) if I assume an elastic hit.
It takes time to transfer the momentum of a big mass to a small mass. It is not like this here (both masses are the same):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFXUzf0ZC7c


better here:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFXUzf0ZC7c


In the cyl & spheres experiment there is a constant physical connection between the spheres and the cylinder. From your vids I can
tell that it takes 60 to 90 degrees of rotation of the cylinder to transfer all the momentum to the spheres until it stops. So does my small
flywheel setup I made which I can not show here for different reasons. I damaged the bearing so I can give no proof.


However I have to admit that it would be an interesting setup to create. I need to stay focussed on finding a solution for the cyl & spheres.
I will not spend time with an experiment which - according to my experience as an engineer- has an apparent risk to fail.
That does not mean that I do not enjoy our discussion


When we look for short-cuts in solutions for a problem[size=78%] [/size]( avoiding engineering-problems with the cyl & spheres )  we can learn from this here:
The shortest paths might not be the fastest ( Baristochrone )


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6XgX88954Y


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nssTS3yen0


Mike