Determining a smooth motion when given a function

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on determining the smoothness of the function x(t) at specific points and intervals. The function is defined piecewise, and participants argue that it is not smooth at t = 1 and t = 2 because the first derivatives from the left and right do not match, indicating a lack of continuity in the derivative. The formula provided in the book, meant to demonstrate smoothness, is also questioned as it primarily addresses continuity. Graphical analysis supports the claim that the function's slope changes abruptly at the critical points, further confirming the absence of smoothness. Overall, the consensus is that the function does not meet the criteria for smoothness at the specified points.
vande060
Messages
180
Reaction score
0
Show from Eq. 1.1 that the below function is smooth at t = 1 and at t = 2. Is it smooth at any 1 < t < 2?

x(t) =

1.0 + 2.0 t 0 ≤ t ≤ 1
3 + 4(t − 1) 1 ≤ t ≤ 2
7 + 3(t − 2) 2 ≤ t




for equation 1.1 my book gives me:

lim
dt→0 [x(t + dt) − x(t) ]/dt= 0




This problem asks me to show that the motion is smooth, but to me it seems that it would not be smooth at points 1 and 2. the way i understand it, for a motion to be smooth all of the derivatives of x(t) must exist, but if i take the derivatives:

2 0 ≤ t ≤ 1
4 1 ≤ t ≤ 2
3 2 ≤ t

the derivatives at points 1 and 2 conflict, so i don't understand how this meets the requirements of a smooth function. i must be missing something obvious.

Also i was confused by the formula 1.1 in the book, it tell me to use this formula to show the motion is smooth, but then next to the formula in the book it states the formula as being one used to show a function is continuous.

Thank you in advance to anyone who responds.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Curious question; probably should be over on one of the math forums.
What exactly is the definition of smooth? I graphed the function from 0 to 3 and it is continuous, but the first derivative does not exist at 1 and at 2 because the value of eqn 1.1 is different when you approach from the left or the right. We say the whole limit does not exist if the left limit is not equal to the right limit.
 
Delphi51 said:
Curious question; probably should be over on one of the math forums.
What exactly is the definition of smooth? I graphed the function from 0 to 3 and it is continuous, but the first derivative does not exist at 1 and at 2 because the value of eqn 1.1 is different when you approach from the left or the right. We say the whole limit does not exist if the left limit is not equal to the right limit.

thanks for the reply, the definition of a smooth motion, as given in my book, is : for a motion to be smooth all of the derivatives of x(t) must exist, but if i take the derivatives.

my intuition was that this function is not smooth, because points one and two have trouble with derivatives, any ideas? Again, my book asks me to show the motion as smooth, but i don't understand how it could be by the definition.
 
Definitely not smooth at 1 and 2. You can see that on the graph - the slope changes suddenly at those points, so no value can be assigned to the slope or first derivative at t = 1 or t = 2. Looks like the question got mixed up.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...

Similar threads

Back
Top