Work for a force function of x, v, t

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter quasar987
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force Function Work
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of work in physics, specifically regarding the definition of work as an integral involving a force function that depends on position (x), velocity (v), and time (t). Participants explore the implications of this definition and whether work can be zero when a particle returns to its initial position.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the validity of the work integral when force is a function of x, v, and t, suggesting that the integral should involve differentials dx, dv, and dt unless certain variables are held fixed.
  • Another participant argues that the integral around a closed loop is zero only for conservative forces, citing that non-conservative forces, like friction, do not allow for recovery of energy expended.
  • A different participant expresses confusion about integrating a function of three variables along only one variable, questioning the mathematical formulation of the problem.
  • One participant suggests that unless the discussion involves phase space, the force should be treated as a function of either time or position alone, implying a need for clarity in the definitions used.
  • There is a reiteration that work equals zero for a closed loop only for forces that depend strictly on position, as all conservative forces are functions of position.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the treatment of the work integral and the conditions under which work can be zero. No consensus is reached on the validity of the initial claim or the implications of the force function's dependencies.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the assumptions made about the force function and its dependencies, as well as the mathematical treatment of the integral. There is an acknowledgment that the discussion may require further clarification on the definitions of conservative and non-conservative forces.

quasar987
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Messages
4,796
Reaction score
32
Hey people. This is crazy! I haven't had TIME to check out the forum since class began. I do nothing but study and still am (at least a little) late in every class!

Anyway I do have a question about physics to which I haven't been able to find the answer. I was hoping you guys could help! For the record, I use the book 'Mechanics', third edition by Symon. It is written in there that the work, W, is defined has follow

[tex]W=\int_{0}^{t} F(x, v, t) v dt[/tex]

Now it is obvious that if F is simply a function of x, we can simplify vdt=dx and change the limits of the integral from 0 and t to 0 and x. And if x(t) = x(0) = 0 then W = 0. But for force function of x, v and t, it is not so easy to show that if the particle ends up at his initial position, then W = 0. In fact, according to what the calculations I've made, I would tend to say that it isn't.

So, is it? And how do you know?

Thanks for your imputs!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That makes no sense to me, If force is a function of (x,v,t), then the integral must be in terms of dx,dv,dt unless you are assuming they are held fixed. If not, shouldn't the formula be expressed as, F(x(t),v(t),t)dt ?
 
Quasar,

That's because the integral around a closed loop is zero only for special circumstances - namely the force must be a conservative one! As hard as I might try I will not recover the energy I expended in moving my sandpaper in a circular motion on a board because friction is not a conservative force.
 
Hey tide! :smile: Did you see my comment about the function? Does that make sense to you? I don't see how a function of three variables can be integrated only along one? where is the dx and dv ? That surface charge thing has not worked out for me at all :mad: :smile:
 
cyrusabdollahi said:
Hey tide! :smile: Did you see my comment about the function? Does that make sense to you? I don't see how a function of three variables can be integrated only along one? where is the dx and dv ? That surface charge thing has not worked out for me at all :mad: :smile:

Hi, Cyrus! Yes, I saw that and would agree in a strict mathematical sense. Technically, unless Quasar is talking about a phase space (which I'm quite sure he's not!) then the force is just a function of t alone or x alone. Ordinarliy, x maps on to t from the equations of motion.

Regarding the surface charge problem - you need to realize that the "test charge" and the surface charge interact with each other but we'd best leave that discussion in the appropriate thread!
 
Tide said:
Quasar,

That's because the integral around a closed loop is zero only for special circumstances - namely the force must be a conservative one! As hard as I might try I will not recover the energy I expended in moving my sandpaper in a circular motion on a board because friction is not a conservative force.


I think this comes down to "W egals 0 for a closed loop only for forces depending strictly on x, because all conservative forces are function of position.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
5K
  • · Replies 63 ·
3
Replies
63
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K