or glass. It is finished, probably, within a thousandth of a second, if they are globes of any of these substances not exceeding a yard in diameter. 260. The whole amount, and the direction, of the 'Impact' experienced by either body in any such case, are reckoned according to the 'change of momentum' which it experiences. The amount of the impact is measured by the amount, and its direction by the direction of the change of momentum, which is produced. The component of an impact in a direction parallel to any fixed line is similarly reckoned according to the component change of momentum in that direction. 261. If we imagine the whole time of an impact divided into a very great number of equal intervals, each so short that the force does not vary sensibly during it, the component change of momentum in any direction during any one of these intervals will (§ 185) be equal to the force multiplied by the measure of the interval. Hence the component of the impact is equal to the sum of the forces in all the intervals, multiplied by the length of each interval. 262. Any force in a constant direction acting in any circumstances, for any time great or small, may be reckoned on the same principle; so that what we may call its whole amount during any time, or its time-integral,' will measure, or be measured by, the whole momentum which it generates in the time in question. But this reckoning is not often convenient or useful except when the whole operation considered is over before the position of the body, or configuration of the system of bodies, involved, has altered to such a degree as to bring any other forces into play, or alter forces previously acting, to such an extent as to produce any sensible effect on the momentum measured. Thus if a person presses gently with his hand, during a few seconds, upon a mass suspended by a cord or chain, he produces an effect which, if we know the degree of the force at each instant, may be thoroughly calculated on elementary principles. No approximation to a full determination of the motion, or to answering such a partial question as 'how great will be the whole deflection produced?' can be founded on a knowledge of the time-integral' alone. If, for instance, the force be at first very great and gradually diminish, the effect will be very different from what it would be if the force were to increase very gradually and to cease suddenly, even although the time-integral were the same in the two cases. But if the same body is struck a blow,' in a horizontal direction, either by the hand, or by a mallet or other somewhat hard mass, the action of the force is finished before the suspending cord has experienced any sensible deflection from the vertical. Neither gravity nor any other force sensibly alters the effect of the blow. And therefore the whole momentum at the end of the blow is sensibly equal to the 'amount of the impact,' which is, in this case, simply the timeintegral. 263. Such is the case of Robins' Ballistic Pendulum, a massive G block of wood movable about a horizontal axis at a considerable distance above it-employed to measure the velocity of a cannon or musket-shot. The shot is fired into the block in a horizontal direction perpendicular to the axis. The impulsive penetration is so nearly instantaneous, and the inertia of the block so large compared with the momentum of the shot, that the ball and pendulum are moving on as one mass before the pendulum has been sensibly deflected from the position of equilibrium. This is the essential peculiarity of the ballistic method; which is used also extensively in electro-magnetic researches and in practical electric testing, when the integral quantity of the electricity which has passed in a current of short duration is to be measured. The ballistic formula (§ 272) is applicable, with the proper change of notation, to all such cases. 264. Other illustrations of the cases in which the time-integral gives us the complete solution of the problem may be given without limit. They include all cases in which the direction of the force is always coincident with the direction of motion of the moving body, and those special cases in which the time of action of the force is so short that the body's motion does not, during its lapse, sensibly alter its relation to the direction of the force, or the action of any other forces to which it may be subject. Thus, in the vertical fall of a body, the time-integral gives us at once the change of momentum ; and the same rule applies in most cases of forces of brief duration, as in a 'drive' in cricket or golf. 265. The simplest case which we can consider, and the one usually treated as an introduction to the subject, is that of the collision of two smooth spherical bodies whose centres before collision were moving in the same straight line. The force between them at each instant must be in this line, because of the symmetry of circumstances round it; and by the third law it must be equal in amount on the two bodies. Hence (LEX II.) they must experience changes of motion at equal rates in contrary directions; and at any instant of the impact the integral amounts of these changes of motion must be equal. Let us suppose, to fix the ideas, the two bodies to be moving both before and after impact in the same direction in one line: one of them gaining on the other before impact, and either following it at a less speed, or moving along with it, as the case may be, after the impact is completed. Cases in which the former is driven backwards by the force of the collision, or in which the two moving in opposite directions meet in collision, are easily reduced to dependence on the same formula by the ordinary algebraic convention with regard to positive and negative signs. In the standard case, then, the quantity of motion lost, up to any instant of the impact, by one of the bodies, is equal to that gained by the other. Hence at the instant when their velocities are equalized they move as one mass with a momentum equal to the sum of the momenta of the two before impact. That is to say, if v denote the common velocity at this instant, we have if M, M' denote the masses of the two bodies, and V, V' their velocities before impact. During this first period of the impact the bodies have been, on the whole, coming into closer contact with one another, through a compression or deformation experienced by each, and resulting, as remarked above, in a fitting together of the two surfaces over a finite area. No body in nature is perfectly inelastic; and hence, at the instant of closest approximation, the mutual force called into action between the two bodies continues, and tends to separate them. Unless prevented by natural surface cohesion or welding (such as is always found, as we shall see later in our chapter on Properties of Matter, however hard and well polished the surfaces may be), or by artificial appliances (such as a coating of wax, applied in one of the common illustrative experiments; or the coupling applied between two railway-carriages when run together so as to push in the springs, according to the usual practice at railway-stations), the two bodies are actually separated by this force, and move away from one another. Newton found that, provided the impact is not so violent as to make any sensible permanent indentation in either body, the relative velocity of separation after the impact bears a proportion to their previous relative velocity of approach, which is constant for the same two bodies. This proportion, always less than unity, approaches more and more nearly to it the harder the bodies are. Thus with balls of compressed wool he found it, iron nearly the same, glass 15. The results of more recent experiments on the same subject have confirmed Newton's law. These will be described later. In any case of the collision of two balls, let e denote this proportion, to which we give the name Co-efficient of Restitution1; and, with previous notation, let in addition U, U denote the velocities of the two bodies after the conclusion of the impact; in the standard case each being positive, but U'> U. Then we have U'-U=e(V-V') and, as before, since one has lost as much momentum as the other has gained, MU+M'U'=MV+M'V'. From these equations we find (M+M')U=MV+M'V'—eM'(V— V'), with a similar expression for U'. Also we have, as above, (M+M')v=MV+M'V'. Hence, by subtraction, (M+M')(v—U)=eM’(V—V')=e{M'V—(M+M′)v+MV}, 1 In most modern treatises this is called a 'co-efficient of elasticity;' a misnomer, suggested, it may be, by Newton's words, but utterly at variance with modern language and modern knowledge regarding elasticity. These results may be put in words thus:-The relative velocity of either of the bodies with regard to the centre of inertia of the two is, after the completion of the impact, reversed in direction, and diminished in the ratio e: 1. 266. Hence the loss of kinetic energy, being, according to §§ 233, 234, due only to change of kinetic energy relative to the centre of inertia, is to this part of the whole as 1-e2: 1. Thus by $234, Initial kinetic energy Final Loss (M+M')v2 + {M(V−v)2 + {M(v— V′)2. = {(M+M′)v2 + {M(v−U)2 + {M(U—v)2. = {(1 — e2) {M(V— v)2 + M′(v — V′)2}. 267. When two elastic bodies, the two balls supposed above for instance, impinge, some portion of their previous kinetic energy will always remain in them as vibrations. A portion of the loss of energy (miscalled the effect of imperfect elasticity alone) is necessarily due to this cause in every real case. Later, in our chapter on the Properties of Matter, it will be shown as a result of experiment, that forces of elasticity are, to a very close degree of accuracy, simply proportional to the strains (§ 135), within the limits of elasticity, in elastic solids which, like metals, glass, etc., bear but small deformations without permanent change. Hence when two such bodies come into collision, sometimes with greater and sometimes with less mutual velocity, but with all other circumstances similar, the velocities of all particles of either body, at corresponding times of the impacts, will be always in the same proportion. Hence the velocity of separation of the centres of inertia after impact will bear a constant proportion to the previous velocity of approach; which agrees with the Newtonian law. It is therefore probable that a very sensible portion, if not the whole, of the loss of energy in the visible motions of two elastic bodies, after impact, experimented on by Newton, may have been due to vibrations; but unless some other cause also was largely operative, it is difficult to see how the loss was so much greater with iron balls than with glass. 268. In certain definite extreme cases, imaginable although not realizable, no energy will be spent in vibrations, and the two bodies will separate, each moving simply as a rigid body, and having in this simple motion the whole energy of work done on it by elastic force during the collision. For instance, let the two bodies be cylinders, or prismatic bars with flat ends, of the same kind of substance, and of equal and similar transverse sections; and let this substance have the property of compressibility with perfect elasticity, in the direction of the length of the bar, and of absolute resistance to change in every transverse dimension. Before impact, let the two bodies be placed with their lengths in one line, and their transverse sections (if not circular) similarly situated, and let one or both be set in motion in this line. Then, if the lengths of the two be equal, they will separate after impact with the same relative velocity as that with which they approached, and neither will retain any vibratory motion after the end of the collision. The result, as regards the motions of the two bodies after the collision, will be sensibly the same if they are of any real ordinary elastic solid material, provided the greatest transverse diameter of each is very small in comparison of its length. 269. If the two bars are of an unequal length, the shorter will, after the impact, be in exactly the same state as if it had struck another of its own length, and it therefore will move as a rigid body after the collision. But the other will, along with a motion of its centre of gravity, calculable from the principle that its whole momentum must (§ 233) be changed by an amount equal exactly to the momentum gained or lost by the first, have also a vibratory motion, of which the whole kinetic and potential energy will make up the deficiency of energy which we shall presently calculate in the motions of the centres of inertia. For simplicity, let the longer body be supposed to be at rest before the collision. Then the shorter on striking it will be left at rest; this being clearly the result in the case of the e = 1 in the preceding formulae (§ 265) applied to the impact of one body striking another of equal mass previously at rest. The longer bar will move away with the same momentum, and therefore with less velocity of its centre of inertia, and less kinetic energy of this motion, than the other body had before impact, in the ratio of the smaller to the greater mass. It will also have a very remarkable vibratory motion, which, when its length is more than double of that of the other, will consist of a wave running backwards and forwards through its length, and causing the motion of its ends, and, in fact, of every particle of it, to take place by 'fits and starts,' not continuously. The full analysis of these circumstances, though very simple, must be reserved until we are especially occupied with waves, and the kinetics of elastic solids. It is sufficient at present to remark, that the motions of the centres of inertia of the two bodies after impact, whatever they may have been previously, are given by the preceding formulae with for e the value M' where M and M' are the smaller and larger mass respectively. M' 270. The mathematical theory of the vibrations of solid elastic spheres has not yet been worked out; and its application to the case of the vibrations produced by impact presents considerable difficulty. Experiment, however, renders it certain, that but a small part of the whole kinetic energy of the previous motions can remain in the form of vibrations after the impact of two equal spheres of glass or of ivory. This is proved, for instance, by the common observation, that one of them remains nearly motionless after striking the other previously at rest; since, the velocity of the common centre of inertia of the two being necessarily unchanged by the impact, we infer that the |