How does my book get ##\frac{1}{2}## by this derivation?

In summary: The first question is answered by the fact that ##\vec{v}\cdot\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}\neq \frac{d}{dt}(\vec{v}\cdot\vec{v})##. You can use the product rule for derivatives to see this. The second question is answered by the fact that when you integrate ##\frac{d}{dt}v^2##, you get ##v^2##, not ##2v^2##. The last question is answered by the fact that the ##\frac{1}{2}## comes from the integration of ##2\vec{v}\cdot\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}##,
  • #1
n3pix
15
1
TL;DR Summary
A question about derivation of the formula of Work.
The integral is called the line integral of ##F## from ##A## to ##B##. The work done in the displacement by the force is defined as,

##W(A\rightarrow B)=\int_A^B \vec{F}.dr##

where the limits ##A## and ##B## stand for the positions ##r_A## and ##r_B##.

We now return to the free particle subject
to forces. We want to generalize ##Eq. (5.6)##, which we here repeat,

##\frac{1}{2}Mv^2-\frac{1}{2}Mv_0^2=\vec{F}.(y-y_0)##

to include applied forces that vary in direction and magnitude but are known as functions of position throughout the region where the motion occurs. By substituting ##\vec{F}=M\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}## into ##Eq. (5.12)##, where ##\vec{F}## is the vector sum of the forces, we find for the work done by these forces,

##W(A\rightarrow B)=M\int_A^B \frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.d\vec{r}##

Now

##d\vec{r}=\frac{d\vec{r}}{dt}.dt=\vec{v}dt##

So that

##W(A\rightarrow B)=M\int_A^B (\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.v)dt##

where the limits ##A## and ##B## now stand for the times ##t_A## and ##t_B## when the particle is at the positions designated by ##A## and ##B##. But we can rearrange the integrand,

##\frac{d}{dt}v^2=\frac{d}{dt}(\vec{v}.\vec{v})=2\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.\vec{v}##

Question 1: In the above equation, how could we gather ##\vec{v}## because one of them is in the derivation (##\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}##) and another one is free (##\vec{v}##) and together they do ##\frac{d}{dt}(\vec{v}.\vec{v})##. Is it legal to do?

so that

##2\int_A^B(\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.\vec{v})dt=\int_A^B(\frac{d}{dt}v^2)dt=\int_A^Bd(v^2)=(v_B^2-v_A^2)##

Question 2: Here, there were ##2## in the first equation but where is it in the second equation? It's confusing...

On substitution in ##Eq. (5.14)## we have an important result:

##W(A\rightarrow B)=\int_A^B \vec{F}.d\vec{r}=\frac{1}{2}Mv_B^2-\frac{1}{2}Mv_A^2##

for the free particle. This is a generalization of ##Eq. (5.6)##. We recognize,

##K=\frac{1}{2}Mv^2##

Thanks...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
n3pix said:
##\frac{d}{dt}v^2=\frac{d}{dt}(\vec{v}.\vec{v})=2\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.\vec{v}##

Question 1: In the above equation, how could we gather ##\vec{v}## because one of them is in the derivation (##\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}##) and another one is free (##\vec{v}##) and together they do ##\frac{d}{dt}(\vec{v}.\vec{v})##. Is it legal to do?

In general:

##\frac{d}{dt}(\vec{u}.\vec{v})= \vec u \cdot \frac{d\vec{v}}{dt} + \frac{d\vec{u}}{dt} \cdot \vec{v}##

Hence:

##\frac{d}{dt}(\vec{v}.\vec{v})= 2\vec v \cdot \frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}##

n3pix said:
so that

##2\int_A^B(\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.\vec{v})dt=\int_A^B(\frac{d}{dt}v^2)dt=\int_A^Bd(v^2)=(v_B^2-v_A^2)##

Question 2: Here, there were ##2## in the first equation but where is it in the second equation? It's confusing...

On substitution in ##Eq. (5.14)## we have an important result:

##W(A\rightarrow B)=\int_A^B \vec{F}.d\vec{r}=\frac{1}{2}Mv_B^2-\frac{1}{2}Mv_A^2##

for the free particle. This is a generalization of ##Eq. (5.6)##. We recognize,

##K=\frac{1}{2}Mv^2##

Thanks...

I don't understand your question here. That's a just a straight integration of the above equation.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and n3pix
  • #3
PeroK said:
In general:

##\frac{d}{dt}(\vec{u}.\vec{v})= \vec u \cdot \frac{d\vec{v}}{dt} + \frac{d\vec{u}}{dt} \cdot \vec{v}##

Hence:

##\frac{d}{dt}(\vec{v}.\vec{v})= 2\vec v \cdot \frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}##
I don't understand your question here. That's a just a straight integration of the above equation.

I mean, in this quote;

n3pix said:
##W(A\rightarrow B)=M\int_B^A (\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.\vec{v})dt##

where the limits ##A## and ##B## now stand for the times ##t_A## ##t_A## when the particle is at the positions designated by ##A## and ##B##. But we can rearrange the integrand,

##\frac{d}{dt}{\vec{v}}^2=\frac{d}{dt}(\vec{v}.\vec{v})=2\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.\vec{v}##

In the integral (##W(A\rightarrow B)=M\int_B^A (\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.\vec{v})dt##) the integrand is ##(\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.\vec{v})## and it can not be equal to ##(\frac{d}{dt}{\vec{v}}^2)##. But the derivation says that it is equal to this. Check it again please.

In my second question, I mean that

##2\int_A^B(\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.\vec{v})dt=\int_A^B(\frac{d}{dt}v^2)dt=\int_A^Bd(v^2)=(v_B^2-v_A^2)##

In this integral, first stage has ##2## (##2\int_A^B(\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.\vec{v})dt##) but in the second stage it doesn't have ##2## (##=\int_A^B(\frac{d}{dt}v^2)dt##) Where the ##2## gone?

And I want to add another question.

In the last equation (##W(A\rightarrow B)=\int_A^B \vec{F}.d\vec{r}=\frac{1}{2}Mv_B^2-\frac{1}{2}Mv_A^2##) Where the ##\frac{1}{2}## came from? I can't see any ##\frac{1}{2}## in the all of the derivation.

Thanks again.
 
  • #4
n3pix said:
In this integral, first stage has ##2## (##2\int_A^B(\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}.\vec{v})dt##) but in the second stage it doesn't have ##2## (##=\int_A^B(\frac{d}{dt}v^2)dt##) Where the ##2## gone?

Just look at the previous equation:

##\frac{d}{dt}(\vec{v}.\vec{v})= 2\vec v \cdot \frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}##

That's where the ##2## comes from!

The final ##\frac 1 2## arises simply by dividing both sides of the equation by ##2##.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and n3pix

1. How do you determine the validity of a derivation?

The validity of a derivation is determined by checking if the logical steps and assumptions made are accurate and follow the laws of logic. This can be done by double-checking calculations, referencing established theories and principles, and seeking peer review.

2. What is the importance of using clear and concise language in a derivation?

Using clear and concise language in a derivation is crucial because it ensures that the steps and reasoning are easily understandable and can be replicated by others. It also helps to avoid confusion and potential errors in the derivation.

3. How do you handle assumptions in a derivation?

Assumptions in a derivation should be clearly stated and justified based on established theories and principles. They should also be kept to a minimum to avoid introducing unnecessary complexities into the derivation.

4. Can a derivation be considered complete without experimental evidence?

No, a derivation alone is not enough to prove a scientific theory or concept. Experimental evidence is necessary to validate the results of a derivation and provide support for the proposed explanation.

5. How can one improve their skills in creating derivations?

One can improve their skills in creating derivations by practicing regularly, seeking feedback from peers and experts, and studying established theories and principles. It is also important to stay updated with current research and advancements in the field.

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
700
  • Classical Physics
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
706
  • Classical Physics
Replies
15
Views
552
  • Classical Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
31
Views
1K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
10
Views
962
Replies
2
Views
769
  • Classical Physics
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top