Why is \frac{1}{2}at^2 used in this equation instead of at^2?

  • Thread starter Esran
  • Start date
In summary, the equation d=v_0t+\frac{1}{2}at^2 is derived from the constant acceleration equation v=v_0+at by integrating it with respect to time. The 1/2 in the equation accounts for the non-constant velocity during the time interval. This can also be seen by understanding that the average velocity during this time is v_0 + 1/2at.
  • #1
Esran
[tex]d=v_0t+\frac{1}{2}at^2[/tex]

Why is it [tex]\frac{1}{2}at^2[/tex]? Why not [tex]at^2[/tex] instead? I know that the reason is probably pretty obvious, but I'm having trouble finding it.

Thanks for your help.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Integrate [tex]v=v_0 + a t[/tex] with respect to [tex]t [/tex].
 
  • #3
Esran said:
[tex]d=v_0t+\frac{1}{2}at^2[/tex]

Why is it [tex]\frac{1}{2}at^2[/tex]? Why not [tex]at^2[/tex] instead? I know that the reason is probably pretty obvious, but I'm having trouble finding it.

Thanks for your help.

In case you haven't had integration yet, try this.

Since a is constant, you can graph v in the t,v plane as a straight line slanting up from t=0, v=v0 to some generic point t=t, v=at. Drop a vertical from there and run a horizontal line from the initial point; you have a right triangle and the area of that triangle is the distance made good. But what is the area of a triangle? It is the base (elapsed time=t) times 1/2 the altitude (change in v). But the change in v is at - v0, therefore the distance is given by your formula. Draw the picture.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
I think its a simple substitution using another constant acceleration equation.

[tex]v=v_0 + a t[/tex]

[tex]V^2 = V_0^2 + 2ad[/tex]

[tex]V=\sqrt{V_0^2 + 2ad}[/tex] sub. into the first equation

[tex]\sqrt{V_0^2 + 2ad} = V_0 + at[/tex] Square both sides

[tex]V_0^2 + 2ad = V_0^2 + 2V_0at + a^2t^2[/tex] simplify and divide both sides by 2a

[tex]d=v_0t+\frac{1}{2}at^2[/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • #5
a is the acceleration, which is the change of the velocity per second. You started with velocity [itex]v_{start} = v_0[/itex], so at the end after [itex]t[/itex] seconds the velocity is:
[tex]v_{end} = v_0 + at[/tex]

The average velocity during these [itex]t[/itex] seconds was:

[tex]\frac{v_{start} + v_{end}}{2} = \frac{v_0 + v_0 + at}{2} = \frac{2v_0 + at}{2} = v_0 + \frac{1}{2}at[/tex]

To get the distance traveled during this time you have to multiply this by the time:
[tex]d=(v_0 + \frac{1}{2}at)t = v_0t + \frac{1}{2}at^2[/tex]
 
  • #6
I tried proving this. If you integrate, it is easy. But I tried it the old fashioned way and I am getting the same problem as Esran.
What I did was I had 2 equations to work with. a = (v - vo) / t, and v = d/t

a = ((d/t) - vo)/t
at = (d/t) - vo
at + vo = dt
at^2 + vot = d
where does the 1/2 come in?
 
  • #7
Nenad said:
I tried proving this. If you integrate, it is easy. But I tried it the old fashioned way and I am getting the same problem as Esran.
What I did was I had 2 equations to work with. a = (v - vo) / t, and v = d/t

a = ((d/t) - vo)/t
at = (d/t) - vo
at + vo = dt
at^2 + vot = d
where does the 1/2 come in?

The error comes in because you let v=d/t, which is not the instantaneous velocity, but rather the AVERAGE velocity since v isn't a constant (there is an "a", remember?).

Zz.
 
  • #8
ohh, k , thanx
 
  • #9
Esran said:
[tex]d=v_0t+\frac{1}{2}at^2[/tex]

Why is it [tex]\frac{1}{2}at^2[/tex]? Why not [tex]at^2[/tex] instead? I know that the reason is probably pretty obvious, but I'm having trouble finding it.

Thanks for your help.

Self Adjoint explained the math to it.

The reason behind it is this. Acceleration is fow fast your velocity is increasing. If you started out from rest and accelerated at 10 m/s^2, you would be traveling 10 m/s after one second. But you didn't travel 10 m/s for the entire second. You were traveling 0 m/s at time 0, 1 m/s after .1 seconds, 2 m/s after .2 seconds, etc. Your average velocity was 5 m/s (1/2 your acceleration).

This continues on even after the first second, except now you're starting at 10 m/s and reach 20 m/s by the end of the 2nd second. In other words, your average velocity for the 2nd second is 15 m/s. You total distance, so far, is 20 meters (5 meters the first second and 15 meters the 2nd second). You can keep going on second by second like this. The 1/2 a accounts for the non-constant velocity while the t^2 accounts for the accumulating distance from second to second.
 
  • #10
Yeah back when I was a freshmen and just started physics I wondered what was up with that equation. Since I learned a little calculus I understand.
 
  • #11
I vote BobG has having the best answer.
 
  • #12
its good, but i like gerben's better
 
  • #13
gerben said:
a is the acceleration, which is the change of the velocity per second. You started with velocity [itex]v_{start} = v_0[/itex], so at the end after [itex]t[/itex] seconds the velocity is:
[tex]v_{end} = v_0 + at[/tex]

The average velocity during these [itex]t[/itex] seconds was:

[tex]\frac{v_{start} + v_{end}}{2} = \frac{v_0 + v_0 + at}{2} = \frac{2v_0 + at}{2} = v_0 + \frac{1}{2}at[/tex]

To get the distance traveled during this time you have to multiply this by the time:
[tex]d=(v_0 + \frac{1}{2}at)t = v_0t + \frac{1}{2}at^2[/tex]

While this proof works, it should be noted that the "average velocity during these [itex]t[/itex] seconds was [itex]\frac{v_{start} + v_{end}}{2} [/itex]" is a consequence of the acceleration being constant. Recall that "average velocity" means "time-weighted average of the velocities", not merely a straight average of the velocities at the endpoints. Indeed, following the definitions
[tex]
\begin{align*}
v_{avg}
&\equiv\frac{x_f-x_0}{t_f-t_0}\\
&=\frac{\left[x_0+v_0t+\frac{1}{2}at^2\right]-x_0}{\left[ t \right]}\\&=v_0+\frac{1}{2}at \\
&= v_0+\frac{1}{2}\left( v_f-v_0 \right) = \frac{1}{2}\left(v_f+v_0 \right)
\end{align *}
[/tex]

In some texts, the above expression for average velocity as one-half the sum of initial and final velocities is justified by drawing a velocity-vs-time graph and essentially arguing that the area under the red curve is equal to the area under the green curve. Of course, the area under the red curve is the displacement gained over the interval: the lower rectangle has area [tex]v_0 t[/tex] and the triangle (with height [itex]v_f-v_0=at[/itex]) has area [itex]\frac{1}{2} (at) t[/itex]:

[tex]
\begin{picture}(100,100)(0,0)
\put(0,0){\vector(1,0){100}}
\put(0,0){\vector(0,1){100}}
\put(0,30){\textcolor{red}{\line(3,1){100}}}
\put(0,30){\textcolor{red}{v{\scriptsize \textcolor{red}{0} }}}
\put(0,47){\textcolor{green}{\line(1,0){100}}}
\put(0,50){\textcolor{green}v{\scriptsize \textcolor{green}{avg}}}
\put(0,30){\line(1,0){100}}
\put(100,64){\line(0,-1){64}}
\put(0,64){\textcolor{red}{v{\scriptsize \textcolor{red}{f} }}}
\put(95,0){t}
\end{picture}
[/tex]
 

1. How do you determine the variables used in the equation?

The variables used in an equation are determined by identifying the factors that affect the phenomenon being studied. These variables are based on previous research, experimental data, and theoretical considerations.

2. What steps are involved in deriving an equation?

The steps involved in deriving an equation can vary depending on the specific situation, but generally include identifying the variables, determining the relationships between them, and using mathematical principles and techniques to create a formula that accurately describes the phenomenon being studied.

3. Can you explain the reasoning behind each term in the equation?

Each term in an equation has a specific purpose and represents a relationship between variables. To explain the reasoning behind each term, it is necessary to understand the underlying concepts and principles that the equation is based on.

4. How do you ensure the accuracy of the equation?

To ensure the accuracy of an equation, it is important to validate it through experimentation and comparing it to existing data. Additionally, peer review and further research can help to refine and improve the equation.

5. Are there any limitations or assumptions made in the derivation of the equation?

In most cases, there will be limitations and assumptions made in the derivation of an equation. These can include simplifying assumptions, experimental constraints, and the scope of the research. It is important to acknowledge and understand these limitations when using the equation.

Similar threads

Replies
23
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
146
  • Classical Physics
Replies
1
Views
580
Replies
2
Views
555
Replies
12
Views
689
Replies
8
Views
527
Replies
10
Views
665
Replies
27
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
571
Replies
1
Views
525
Back
Top