Skip to article frontmatterSkip to article content
Site not loading correctly?

This may be due to an incorrect BASE_URL configuration. See the MyST Documentation for reference.

2 Newton’s Laws

Updated: 20 Jul 2026

Now we turn to one of the most profound breakthroughs in the history of science: the laws of motion formulated by Isaac Newton. These laws provide a systematic framework for understanding how and why objects move. They form the backbone of classical mechanics. Using these three laws we can predict the motion of a falling apple, a car accelerating down the road, or a satellite orbiting Earth (though some adjustments are required in this context to make use of e.g. GPS!). More than just equations, they express deep principles about the nature of force, mass, and interaction.

In this chapter, you will begin to develop the core physicist’s skill: building a simplified model of the real world, applying physical principles, and using mathematical tools to reach meaningful conclusions.

Newton’s Three Laws

Much of physics, in particular Classical Mechanics, rests on three laws that carry Newton’s name:

N1 has, in fact, been formulated by Galileo Galilei. Newton has, in his N2, build upon it: N1 is included in N2, after all:
if F⃗=0\vec{F} = 0, then dp⃗dt=0→p⃗=constant→v⃗=constant\frac{d\vec{p}}{dt} = 0 \rightarrow \vec{p} = \text{constant} \rightarrow \vec{v} = \text{constant}, provided mm is a constant.

Most people know N2 as

F⃗=ma⃗\vec{F} = m \vec{a}

For particles of constant mass, the two are equivalent:
if m=constant m = \text{constant} , then

dp⃗dt=mdv⃗dt=ma⃗\frac{d\vec{p}}{dt} = m\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt} = m\vec{a}

Nevertheless, in many cases using the momentum representation is beneficial. The reason is that momentum is one of the key quantities in physics. This is due to the underlying conservation law that we will derive in a minute. Momentum is a more fundamental concept in physics than acceleration. That is another reason why physicists prefer the second way of looking at forces.

Moreover, using momentum allows for a new interpretation of force: force is that quantity that - provided it is allowed to act for some time interval on an object - changes the momentum of that object. This can be formally written as:

dp⃗=F⃗dt↔Δp⃗=∫F⃗dtd\vec{p} = \vec{F} dt \leftrightarrow \Delta \vec{p} = \int \vec{F} dt

The latter quantity I⃗≡∫F⃗dt\vec{I} \equiv \int \vec{F} dt is called the impulse.

In Newton’s laws, velocity, acceleration and momentum are key quantities. We repeat here their formal definition.

Conservation of Momentum

From Newton’s 2nd^{\text{nd}} and 3rd^{\text{rd}} law we can easily derive the law of conservation of momentum. Assume there are only two point-particle (i.e. particles with no size but with mass), that exert a force on each other. No other forces are present. From N2 we have:

dp⃗1dt=F⃗21dp⃗2dt=F⃗12\frac{d\vec{p}_1}{dt} = \vec{F}_{21} \\ \\ \frac{d\vec{p}_2}{dt} = \vec{F}_{12}

From N3 we know:

F⃗21=−F⃗12\vec{F}_{21} = -\vec{F}_{12}

And, thus by adding the two momentum equations we get:

dp⃗1dt=F⃗21dp⃗2dt=F⃗12=−F⃗21}⇒\left. \begin{array}{ll} \frac{d\vec{p}_1}{dt} &= \vec{F}_{21} \\ \\ \frac{d\vec{p}_2}{dt} &= \vec{F}_{12} = -\vec{F}_{21} \end{array} \right\} \Rightarrow
dp⃗1dt+dp⃗2dt=0→ddt(p⃗1+p⃗2)=0\frac{d\vec{p}_1}{dt} + \frac{d\vec{p}_2}{dt} = 0 \rightarrow \frac{d}{dt} \left ( \vec{p}_1 + \vec{p}_2 \right ) = 0
⇒p⃗1+p⃗2=const i.e. does not depend on time\Rightarrow \vec{p}_1 + \vec{p}_2 = const ~\text{i.e. does } not \text{ depend on time}

Note the importance of the last conclusion: if objects interact via a mutual force then the total momentum of the objects cannot change, no matter what the interaction is. This notion is easily extended to more interacting particles. The crux is that particles interact with one another via forces that obey N3. Thus for three interacting point particles we would have (with F⃗ij \vec{F}_{ij} the force from particle i felt by particle j):

dp⃗1dt=F⃗21+F⃗31dp⃗2dt=F⃗12+F⃗32=−F⃗21+F⃗32dp⃗3dt=F⃗13+F⃗23=−F⃗31−F⃗32}\left. \begin{array}{ll} \frac{d\vec{p}_1}{dt} &= \vec{F}_{21} + \vec{F}_{31} \\ \\ \frac{d\vec{p}_2}{dt} &= \vec{F}_{12} + \vec{F}_{32}= -\vec{F}_{21} + \vec{F}_{32}\\ \\ \frac{d\vec{p}_3}{dt} &= \vec{F}_{13} + \vec{F}_{23}= -\vec{F}_{31} - \vec{F}_{32} \end{array} \right \}

Sum these three equations:

dp⃗1dt+dp⃗2dt+dp⃗3dt=0→ddt(p⃗1+p⃗2+p⃗3)=0⇒p⃗1+p⃗2+p⃗3=const.  i.e. does not depend on time\frac{d\vec{p}_1}{dt} + \frac{d\vec{p}_2}{dt} + \frac{d\vec{p}_3}{dt} = 0 \rightarrow \frac{d}{dt} \left ( \vec{p}_1 + \vec{p}_2 + \vec{p}_3 \right ) = 0 \\ \\ \Rightarrow \vec{p}_1 + \vec{p}_2 + \vec{p}_3 = \text{const.}~\text{ i.e. does } not \text{ depend on time}

For a system of NN particles, extension is straight forward.

Newton’s laws applied

Force addition, subtraction and decomposition

Newton’s laws describe how forces affect motion. Applying them often requires combining multiple forces acting on an object, see Figure 5. This is done through vector addition, subtraction, and decomposition, allowing us to find the net force and to analyze its components in different directions (see this chapter in the book on linear algebra for a full elaboration on vector addition and subtraction).

A central point mass with three forces working on it. The magnitude of each mass is displayed on an analog spring scale.

Figure 5:Three forces acting on a particle. In which direction will it accelerate?

Acceleration due to gravity

In most cases the forces acting on an object are not constant. However, there is a classical case that is treated in physics (already at secondary school level): gravitational force, where only one, constant force acts and other forces are neglected. Hence, according to Newton’s second law, the acceleration is constant.

When we first consider only the motion in the z-direction, we can derive:

a=Fm=const.a=\frac{F}{m}=\text{const.}

Hence, for the velocity:

v(t)=v0+∫t0teadt=a(te−t0)+v0v(t) = v_0 + \int_{t_0}^{t_e} a dt = a(t_e-t_0) + v_0

assuming t0=0 and te=t⇒v(t)=v0+att_0=0 \text{ and } t_e=t \Rightarrow v(t)=v_0+at the position is described by

s(t)=∫0tv(t)dt=∫0tat+v0dt=12at2+v0t+s0s(t) = \int_{0}^{t} v(t)dt = \int_{0}^{t} at + v_0 dt = \frac{1}{2}at^2 + v_0t + s_0

Rearranging:

s(t)=12at2+v0t+s0s(t) = \frac{1}{2}at^2 + v_0t + s_0
Source
Source

Frictional forces

There are two main types of frictional force:

Fstatic,max=μsNF_{static,max}=\mu_sN

where μs\mu_s is the coefficient of static friction and NN is the normal force. If the applied force exceeds this maximum, the object begins to slide.

Fkinetic=μkNF_{kinetic} = \mu_k N

where μk\mu_k is the coefficient of kinetic friction. This force does not depend on the velocity of the object, only on the normal force and surface characteristics.

Friction always acts opposite to the direction of intended or actual motion and is essential in both preventing and controlling movement.

Material PairStatic Friction (μs\mu_s)Kinetic Friction (μk\mu_k)
Rubber on dry concrete1.00.8
Steel on steel (dry)0.740.57
Wood on wood (dry)0.50.3
Aluminum on steel0.610.47
Ice on ice0.10.03
Glass on glass0.940.4
Copper on steel0.530.36
Teflon on Teflon0.040.04
Rubber on wet concrete0.60.5
Leather on wood0.560.4

Values are approximate and can vary depending on surface conditions.

Source

Momentum example

The above theoretical concept is simple in its ideas:

But it is incredible powerful and so generic, that finding when and how to use it is much less straight forward. The beauty of physics is its relatively small set of fundamental laws. The difficulty of physics is these laws can be applied to almost anything. The trick is how to do that, how to start and get the machinery running. That can be very hard. Luckily there is a recipe to master it: it is called practice.

Forces & Inertia

Newton’s laws introduce the concept of force. Forces have distinct features:

a⃗=F⃗m↔dv⃗=a⃗dt=F⃗dtm\vec{a} = \frac{\vec{F}}{m} \leftrightarrow d\vec{v} = \vec{a}dt = \frac{\vec{F}dt}{m}
dp⃗dt=F⃗↔dp⃗=F⃗dt\frac{d\vec{p}}{dt} = \vec{F} \leftrightarrow d\vec{p} = \vec{F}dt

Many physicists like the second bullet: forces change the momentum of an object, but for that they need time to act.

Momentum is a more fundamental concept in physics than acceleration. That is another reason why physicists prefer the second way of looking at forces.

Source

Inertia

We often take the idea of mass for granted. It is how heavy something is. However, we can think of mass as the resistance to changing velocity, also called intertia and denoted by mm for mass. And mass is that property of an object that characterizes its resistance to changing its velocity. Actually, we should have written something like mi m_i , with subscript i denoting inertia.

Why? There is another property of objects, also called mass, that is part of Newton’s Gravitational Law.

Two bodies of mass m1 m_1 and m2 m_2 that are separated by a distance r12r_{12} attract each other via the so-called gravitational force (r^12\hat{r}_{12} is a unit vector along the line connecting m1m_1 and m2m_2):

F⃗12=−Gm1m2r122r^12\vec{F}_{12} = - G \frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2_{12}}\hat{r}_{12}

Here, we should have used a different symbol, rather than m m . Something like mg m_g , as it is by no means obvious that the two ‘masses’ mi m_i and mg m_g refer to the same property. If you find that confusing, think about inertia and electric forces. Two particles with each an electric charge, q1q_1 and q2q_2, respectively exert a force on each other known as the Coulomb force:

F⃗C,12=14πϵ0q1q2r122r^12\vec{F}_{C,12} = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0} \frac{q_1 q_2}{r^2_{12}}\hat{r}_{12}

We denote the property associated with electric forces by q q and call it charge. We have no problem writing

F⃗=ma⃗F⃗C=14πϵ0qQr2r^\vec{F} = m \vec{a} \\ \vec{F}_C = \frac{1}{4\pi \epsilon_0} \frac{q Q}{r^2} \hat{r}

We do not confuse qq by mm or vice versa. They are really different quantities: qq tells us that the particle has a property we call ‘charge’ and that it will respond to other charges, either being attracted to, or repelled from. How fast it will respond to this force of another charged particle depends on mm. If mm is big, the particle will only get a small acceleration; the strength of the force does not depend on mm at all. So far, so good. But what about mgm_g? That property of a particle that makes it being attracted to another particle with this same property, that we could have called ‘gravitational charge’. It is clearly different from ‘electrical charge’. But would it have been logical that it was also different from the property inertial mass, mim_i?

F⃗=mia⃗F⃗g=−GmgMgr2r^\begin{aligned} \vec{F} &= m_i \vec{a} \\ \vec{F}_g &= -G \frac{m_g M_g}{r^2} \hat{r} \end{aligned}

As far as we can tell (via experiments) mi m_i and mg m_g are the same. Actually, it was Einstein who postulated that the two are referring to the same property of an object: there is no difference.

Force field
We have seen, forces like gravity and electrostatics act between objects. When you push a car, the force is applied locally, through direct contact. In contrast, gravitational and electrostatic forces act over a distance — they are present throughout space, though they still depend on the positions of the objects involved.

One powerful way to describe how a force acts at different locations in space is through the concept of a force field. A force field assigns a force vector (indicating both direction and magnitude) to every point in space, telling you what force an object would experience if placed there.

For example, the graph below at the left shows a gravitational field, described by F⃗g=GmMr2r^\vec{F}_g=G\frac{mM}{r^2}\hat{r}. Any object entering this field is attracted toward the central mass with a force that depends on its distance from that mass’s center.

The figure on the right shows the force field that a positively charged particle would feel due to the presence of 2 negatively charged particles (both of the same charge). Clearly this is a much more complicated force field.

Source
The force field that a positively charged particle would feel due to the presence of 2 negatively charged particles (both of the same charge).

Figure 17:The force field that a positively charged particle would feel due to the presence of 2 negatively charged particles (both of the same charge).

Measuring mass or force
So far we did not address how to measure force. Neither did we discuss how to measure mass. This is less trivial than it looks at first side. Obviously, force and mass are coupled via N2: F=ma F = m a .

A simplified drawing of a scale, with a stack of six small standard masses on the left and one big unknown mass on the right. The scale is in balance.

Figure 18:Can force be measured using a balance?

The acceleration can be measured when we have a ruler and a clock, i.e. once we have established how to measure distance and how to measure time intervals, we can measure position as a function of time and from that velocity and acceleration.

But how to find mass? We could agree upon a unit mass, an object that represents by definition 1 kg. In fact we did. But that is only step one. The next question is: how do we compare an unknown mass to our standard. A first reaction might be: put them on a balance and see how many standard kilograms you need (including fractions of it) to balance the unknown mass. Sounds like a good idea, but is it? Unfortunately, the answer is not a ‘yes’.

As on second thought: the balance compares the pull of gravity. Hence, it ‘measures’ gravitational mass, rather than inertia. Luckily, Newton’s laws help. Suppose we let two objects, our standard mass and the unknown one, interact under their mutual interaction force. Every other force is excluded. Then, on account on N2 we have

{m1a1=F21m2a2=F12=−F21\left\{ \begin{array}{l} m_1 a_1 = F_{21} \\ m_2 a_2 = F_{12} = -F_{21} \end{array} \right.

where we used N3 for the last equality. Clearly, if we take the ratio of these two equations we get:

m1m2=∣a2a1∣\frac{m_1}{m_2} = \left | \frac{a_2}{a_1} \right |

irrespective of the strength or nature of the forces involved. We can measure acceleration and thus with this rule express the unknown mass in terms of our standard.

Now that we know how to determine mass, we also have solved the problem of measuring force. We just measure the mass and the acceleration of an object and from N2 we can find the force. This allows us to develop ‘force measuring equipment’ that we can calibrate using the method discussed above.

Eötvös experiment on mass

The question whether inertial mass and gravitational mass are the same has put experimentalists to work. It is by no means an easy question. Gravity is a very weak force. Moreover, determining that two properties are identical via an experiment is virtually impossible due to experimental uncertainty. Experimentalist can only tell the outcome is ‘identical’ within a margin. Newton already tried to establish experimentally that the two forms of mass are the same. However, in his days the inaccuracy of experiments was rather large. Dutch scientist Simon Stevin concluded in 1585 that the difference must be less than 5%. He used his famous ‘drop masses from the church’ experiments for this (they were primarily done to show that every mass falls with the same acceleration).

A couple of years later, Galilei used both fall experiments and pendula to improve this to: less than 2%. In 1686, Newton using pendula managed to bring it down to less than 1‰ .

An important step forward was set by the Hungarian physicist, Loránd Eötvös (1848-1918). We will here briefly introduce the experiment. For a full analysis, we need knowledge about angular momentum and centrifugal forces that we do not deal with in this book.

The experiment
The essence of the Eötvös experiment is finding a set up in which both gravity (sensitive to the gravitational mass) and some inertial force (sensitive to the inertial mass) are present. Obviously, gravitational forces between two objects out of our daily life are extremely small. These will be very difficult to detect and thus introduce a large error if the experiment relies on measuring them. Eötvös came up with a different idea. He connected two different objects with different masses, m1m_1 and m2m_2, via a (almost) massless rod. Then, he attached a thin wire to the rod and let it hang down.

Mass m1 and m2 are connected to either end of a horizontal rod. The rod, in turn, is connected by a vertical wire to the ceiling. The rod can rotate around its suspension point.

Figure 20:Torsion balance used by Eötvös.

This is a sensitive device: any mismatch in forces or torques will have the setup either tilt or rotate a bit. Eötvös attached a tiny mirror to one of the arms of the rod. If you shine a light beam on the mirror and let it reflect and be projected on a wall, then the smallest deviation in position will be amplified to create a large motion of the light spot on the wall.

In Eötvös experiment two forces are acting on each of the masses: gravity, proportional to mgm_g, but also the centrifugal force Fc=miRω2F_c = m_i R \omega^2, the centrifugal force stemming from the fact that the experiment is done in a frame of reference rotating with the earth. This force is proportional to the inertial mass. The experiment is designed such that if the rod does not show any rotation around the vertical axis, then the gravitational mass and inertial mass must be equal. It can be done with great precision and Eötvös observed no measurable rotation of the rod. From this he could conclude that the ratio of the gravitational over inertial mass differed less from 1 than 5⋅10−8 5 \cdot 10^{-8}. Currently, experimentalist have brought this down to 1⋅10−15 1 \cdot 10^{-15}.

Footnotes
References
  1. Gribbin, J. (2019). The scientists: A history of science told through the lives of its greatest inventors. Random House.
  2. Kortemeyer, G. (2025). First semester exam. AIP Publishing. 10.60893/FIGSHARE.PTE.30542921