Conceptual question about the Kinetic Energy Equation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the distinction between speed and velocity in the kinetic energy equation K = 1/2 mv². It clarifies that "v" represents speed, the magnitude of the velocity vector, making kinetic energy a scalar quantity. The equation allows for expressing speed as v = dx/dt, but this does not specify direction, raising questions about the relationship between speed and velocity. The conversation highlights that while velocity is a vector with direction, the square of velocity in the kinetic energy formula results in a scalar. Ultimately, the discussion emphasizes that only v² is scalar, while velocity itself remains a vector.
Xyius
Messages
501
Reaction score
4
So as you all know, kinetic energy is..
K=\frac{1}{2}mv^2

The question I have is the followng.

The "v" in this formula isn't really velocity, its speed is it not? Which is just the magnitude of the velocity vector with no direction information. Kinetic energy is a scalar quantity so with this formula am I allowed to write..

v=\frac{dx}{dt}

Since this is just speed, which is the magnitude of the velocity vector, how does this make sense? Couldn't it just as easily be dy/dt or dz/dt? When deriving the kinetic energy formula from Newtons Second Law, you end up with the integral of "Fv" on one side and manipulate v to "dx/dt" to get the work integral.

I guess the main point of my question is, how can v=dx/dt when "v" isn't specifying any particular direction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
v2 is the dot product of (v)(v) which is a scalar equal to the square of the magnitude of v. So velocity2 = speed2, but velocity in the expression 1/2 m v2 is a vector and does have a direction.
 
rcgldr said:
v2 is the dot product of (v)(v) which is a scalar equal to the square of the magnitude of v. So velocity2 = speed2, but velocity in the expression 1/2 m v2 is a vector and does have a direction.

So basically, only the square of v is scalar? But velocity itself is a vector? Makes sense! Thanks :D
 
Consider this:

K = \frac{1}{2}mv^2 = \frac{1}{2}m (v_x^2 + v_y^2 + v_z^2)<br /> = \frac{1}{2}m \left[ {\left( \frac{dx}{dt} \right)}^2 + {\left( \frac{dy}{dt} \right)}^2<br /> + {\left( \frac{dz}{dt} \right)}^2 \right]
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top