Calculating velocity on an inclined plane

AI Thread Summary
An object on an inclined plane accelerates at 2 m/s² from an initial velocity of zero. After one second, its velocity reaches 2 m/s, covering a distance of 1 meter during that time. The relationship between acceleration, velocity, and displacement is clarified using kinematic equations. The equation v² = v₁² + 2aD confirms that the object travels 1 meter while accelerating. Therefore, initial velocity being zero is crucial in understanding the object's motion.
Bashyboy
Messages
1,419
Reaction score
5
So, this particular plane is angled so that a certain object will roll at a constant acceleration of 2 m/s each second. The object's initial velocity will be zero and in one second its velocity will be 2 m/s, but will only have traveled 1 m during that duration between zero and one seconds. Is this true because the object does not travel, initially, 2 m/s?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
well aceleration is m/s^2 not m/s and you should use the 5 kinematic or constant acceleration equations
ie v2^2 = v1^2 +2aD
2^2 = 0 + 2(2)(D)
D=1
So the certain object will reach a speed of 2m/s with a accelertaion of 2m/s^2 in 1 meter.
And yes it is because the object is initially at rest
 
Last edited:
velocity ≠ acceleration. For constant uniform acceleration a in one dimension, with zero initial velocity, the displacement s is:

s = at2/2
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
41
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top