Solve Calculus Equation for Physics | Get Free Gmail Account

  • Thread starter Thread starter rush007
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculus Physics
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the equation s = ut + 1/2 at^2, which is commonly encountered in kinematics. Participants are exploring how to approach this equation using calculus methods, although the exact nature of the request is somewhat unclear.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants attempt to interpret the request as deriving the equation rather than solving it directly. Others question the clarity of the original post and suggest that the equation may not require calculus methods for solution. There are discussions about rewriting the equation in integral and differential forms, as well as considering the quadratic nature of the equation.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with various interpretations being explored. Some participants have offered guidance on rewriting the equation, while others have expressed confusion about the original request. There is no explicit consensus on the intended approach or solution.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the original post lacks clarity, and there are questions about the assumptions underlying the request to use calculus methods. The urgency expressed by the original poster may also be influencing the responses.

rush007
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
-------------========-------------===========-------------========
Can anyone tell me how to solve the s= ut+1/2 at^2 equation in calculus method ? It's urgent! :confused: The one with most detailed answer will get a free Gmail account!

Email me with the answer at riast.ullah@gmail.com

________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
 
Physics news on Phys.org
rush007 said:
-------------========-------------===========-------------========
Can anyone tell me how to solve the s= ut+1/2 at^2 equation in calculus method ? It's urgent! :confused: The one with most detailed answer will get a free Gmail account!

Email me with the answer at riast.ullah@gmail.com

________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
woohoo, a gmail account. they are already free. at this point, almost everyone who wants one has one.
 
rush007 said:
-------------========-------------===========-------------========
Can anyone tell me how to solve the s= ut+1/2 at^2 equation in calculus method ? It's urgent! :confused: The one with most detailed answer will get a free Gmail account!

Email me with the answer at riast.ullah@gmail.com

________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
can you post an intelligible question, please?
 
I don't wonna such an account. So I'll post your an answer directly in this forum.

First you have to rewrite these all in integral and differential form. i.e. for
s=1/2at^2 you can do this by rewriting s=v*t by s=integral[v,dt]. If you go on with this (a=dv/dt and solve this for v you get v=integral[a,dt]. Thus plugging this in the above equation yields s=integral[integral[a,dt],dt]. do this with the ut part and you get what you want I think
 
I can comprehend neither this nor the original post! We are asked in the original post to "solve the s= ut+1/2 at^2 equation in calculus method ?". I have no idea what that means! It is a quadratic equation in t so you could solve for t by using the quadratic formula. It is a linear equation in u and a so you could solve for either of those by using elementary methods. None of those have anything to do with "calculus method" so apparently that isn't what is intended.

I think that Kruger is interpreting this as "derive s= ut+ (1/2)at^2, s is the distance an object moved in time t, a is the constant acceleration and u is the speed at t=0".
He may well be write but that is a heckuvalot more than was said! Assuming that was the intended question, I'm not sure I would phrase exactly as Kruger did.

Acceleration is defined as "the derivative of the speed function" so speed is the anti-derivative of the acceleration. If acceleration is a constant, a, then its antiderivative is simply u(t)= at+ C (C is the arbitrary "constant of integration"). Since (presumably) u(0)= u, u(0)= a(0)+ C= u so C=u and u(t)= at+ u.
But speed is the derivative of the distance function so distance is the anti-derivative of speed, u(t). An anti-derivative of t is (1/2)t^2 and an anti-derivative of the constant u is, again, ut. The anti-derivative of at+ u is (1/2)at^2+ ut+ C where C is again the "constant of integration". Assuming that s is measure from the position at t=0, we have s(0)= (1/2)(0)^2+ u(0)+ C= 0 so C= 0 and s(t)= (1/2)t^2+ ut.

Rush007: Please take the time to state the entire problem as clearly as possible! Showing us what you have already tried or what you think you do understand about the problem will also help us understand it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K