A box sliding down a incline plane

AI Thread Summary
To find the acceleration of a 3kg block sliding down a 30-degree incline, the correct approach is to use the kinematic equation x(t) = x_0 + v_0t + ½at², especially since the block starts from rest. The formula x/(t²) is incorrect for calculating distance traveled under constant acceleration, as it lacks a factor of one-half. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the derivation of kinematic equations and their application in physics problems. It also highlights that while the units of acceleration are correct, the formula used does not yield the correct results for distance. Properly applying the kinematic equation will lead to the accurate calculation of acceleration.
semc
Messages
364
Reaction score
5
A 3kg block starts from rest at the top of a 30degree incline and slides a distance of 2m down the incline in 1.5s find the magnitude of the acceleration.

I have always though to find the acceleration you can just use x/(t*t) but i use this formula but i couldn't get the same as the book. is there something wrong with my understanding?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your formula is incorrect.

You need to use the basic kinematic equation for motion under constant acceleration here. If you happen to need anything else, just differentiate it with respect to time
x(t)=x_0+v_0t+\tfrac{1}{2}at^2

Consider the case where the mass starts at rest, with x_0=0
 
semc said:
A 3kg block starts from rest at the top of a 30degree incline and slides a distance of 2m down the incline in 1.5s find the magnitude of the acceleration.

I have always though to find the acceleration you can just use x/(t*t) but i use this formula but i couldn't get the same as the book. is there something wrong with my understanding?
Write down the relevant equations.
Show your calculations.
 
RoyalCat said:
Your formula is incorrect.

You need to use the basic kinematic equation for motion under constant acceleration here. If you happen to need anything else, just differentiate it with respect to time
x(t)=x_0+v_0t+\tfrac{1}{2}at^2

Consider the case where the mass starts at rest, with x_0=0

can you explain why can't i just use x/(t*t) ?
 
x/(t*t) is the units of acceleration. For example meters per second squared

\frac {m/s^2}
 
Want to learn said:
x/(t*t) is the units of acceleration. For example meters per second squared

\frac {m/s^2}

It is not, however, the formula for the distance traveled. It may share the same units, but it's off by a factor of two.

Let's begin with the basics. We want to develop the kinematic equation for one dimensional motion under constant acceleration:

Our only givens are the initial position with respect to some origin, the initial velocities and accelerations with respect to a certain frame of reference, and the fact that the acceleration is constant.

a(t)=constant
Taking the indefinite integral over time:

v(t)=a\cdot t + C

C=v_0

v(t)=a\cdot t+v_0

We have now found an expression for the velocity as a function of time.

Taking the indefinite integral over time once more yields:

x(t)=\tfrac{1}{2}a\cdot t^2 +v_0\cdot t + C

C=x_0

x(t)=\tfrac{1}{2}a\cdot t^2 +v_0\cdot t + x_0

Q.E.D.

Just to elaborate on the point that has you confused though, differentiate the expression \tfrac{1}{2}at^2 with respect to time.
Remember, (ax^n)'=anx^{n-1}
 
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...
Back
Top