Kat, Matt, and Nat are arguing about why a physics book on a table doesn’t fall. According to Kat, “Gravity pulls down on it, but the table is in the way so it can’t fall.” “Nonsense,” says Matt. “An upward force simply overcomes the downward force to prevent it from falling.” “But what about Newton’s first law?” counters Nat. “It’s not moving, so there can’t be any forces acting on it.” None of the statements is exactly correct. Who comes closest, and how would you change his or her statement to make it correct?

"Gravity pulls it down, but the table prevents it from falling."

Draw a schematic design of the book and list all of the forces at work in the physics book that is sitting still on the table.

The normal response force is an equal and opposing force to weight, according to Newton's third law.

Draw the following free body diagram for the physics book:

The response force is N, while the gravitational force is mg.

The weight is the sole external force acting on the book, as seen in the diagram above.
The ${\overrightarrow{F}}_{\text{net}}$Because the force on the book is zero, Newton's first law states that the book does not change its state of motion. As a result, the book remains motionless.

As a result, Kat's assertion is the most accurate.

"This is the right statement: " "The book is pulled down by gravity, but the table creates an equal and opposite force termed the normal reaction, resulting in a net force of zero on the book. As a result, the book does not change its state of motion, according to Newton's first law. As a result, the book remains motionless."