A new take on a relative velocity problem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on solving a relative velocity problem involving a bullet and a balloon, where the goal is to determine the minimum speed of the bullet required to pop the balloon. A peer attempted to solve the problem using four different equations, but only the second equation yielded a minimum value for the bullet's speed. The second equation effectively incorporates the balloon's height and speed, while the others do not provide essential information for the specific scenario. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding the physical context behind the equations used and emphasizes that the minimum speed is crucial for ensuring the bullet reaches the balloon at the right moment. Overall, the thread illustrates the complexities of applying mathematical concepts to real-world physics problems.
Shreya
Messages
187
Reaction score
64
Homework Statement
A Balloon moves up at 25m/s, 5 seconds later a bullet is fired in the same direction. Find the minimum velocity of the bullet such that it pops the balloon.
Relevant Equations
$$v=u+at$$
$$s=ut+\frac {1}{2} at²$$
$$s=\frac{1}{2} (u+v)t$$
$$v²=u²+2as$$
Where:
$$s=25t + 125$$
$$v = 25m/s$$
$$a=10$$
I can solve this question using relative Velocity or using 2 kinematics equations. But a peer of mine, tried to do it in a different way. He substituted the above said values in the 4 equations and solved for u in terms of t and differentiated them and equated to to 0 to find a maxima. He found that for the 1, 3 and 4th equations, there was no value of t for which u was minimum but the 2nd equation gave the right answer.
Here's a graph of the 4 equations.

The question is - why did the second function have a minima while others didn't.
Please be kind to help!
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20220515-133542_Chrome.png
    Screenshot_20220515-133542_Chrome.png
    20.4 KB · Views: 143
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Equations don't have minima, functions have minima. Your question is unclear because you are not asking about minima of functions.

I would solve the problem by equating the right-hand sides of the 2nd and 5th equations, putting a=-10 in the 2nd equation. That reflects that we must have a time at which both balloon and bullet are at the same height s.

That new equation is a quadratic in t. The quadratic will only have a solution if its discriminant is non-negative. That discriminant is a function of u. So we need to find the smallest value of u that keeps the discriminant non-negative. Find that value of u, then check the result by inserting it in the quadratic and solving to find t, then calculate the height s at which the bullet and balloon meet.

It's a silly question though, because the bullet won't pop the balloon in that case because when it finally touches the balloon, its relative velocity will be zero. So unless the balloon has a needle-sharp tip, it won't pop it!
 
  • Like
Likes nomadreid, Delta2 and Shreya
andrewkirk said:
Equations don't have minima, functions have minima. Your question is unclear because you are not asking about minima of functions.
Sorry, it was wrong paraphrasing. I shall edit it.
What I meant was if we take the maxima of the four functions of u(t), which are:
$$u=10t+25$$
$$u=25+5t+\frac{250}{t}$$
$$u=\frac{25t+250}{t}$$
$$u=\sqrt{500t+3125}$$
andrewkirk said:
It's a silly question though, because the bullet won't pop the balloon in that case because when it finally touches the balloon, its relative velocity will be zero. So unless the balloon has a needle-sharp tip, it won't pop it!
That's true.
 
Note that the balloon is at a height of ##h = 125 \ m## and moving upwards at ##25 \ m/s## when the bullet is fired. If we then consider a frame moving upwards at ##25 \ m/s##, then the bullet must have an initial upwards speed of ##u' = \sqrt{2gh}## in this frame in order to reach its maximum height ##h##. The balloon is stationary at height ##h## in this frame.

To get the required initial speed of the bullet in the ground frame we add ##25 \ m/s## to ##u'##.
 
  • Like
Likes Orodruin, neilparker62, Delta2 and 1 other person
Sorry someone explain me the basics here, if I understand well the balloon does uniform linear motion (the buoyancy force of the balloon eliminates its weight) while the bullet does uniform decelerating motion with deceleration g=10m/s^2?
 
  • Like
Likes Shreya
Ok I see now, basically the *intuitive* claim here is that the minimum speed is such that when the bullet reaches the balloon it has the same speed as the balloon. How do we justify this claim more formally?
 
  • Like
Likes Shreya and Lnewqban
Delta2 said:
Ok I see now, basically the *intuitive* claim here is that the minimum speed is such that when the bullet reaches the balloon it has the same speed as the balloon. How do we justify this claim more formally?
Change frames so that the balloon is stationary?
 
PeroK said:
Change frames so that the balloon is stationary?
Hm yes that seems to do the job, so we look for the minimum speed of bullet so that it reaches a height of 125m under the influence of gravity. Hm but something doesn't look 100% right with this, let me think it abit more.
 
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban
Delta2 said:
Hm yes that seems to do the job, so we look for the minimum speed of bullet so that it reaches a height of 125m under the influence of gravity. Hm but something doesn't look 100% right with this, let me think it abit more.
How much speed a bullet needs to have in order to pop a balloon which is moving at a rate of 90 kilometers per hour?
 
  • #10
Lnewqban said:
How much speed a bullet needs to have in order to pop a balloon which is moving at a rate of 90 kilometers per hour?
at least 90km/h but I don't know something doesn't look 100% rigorous with this, I found the approach described in post #2 more rigorous than the approach of post #4.

However post #4 is what we call a "clever shortcut".
 
  • #11
Delta2 said:
I found the approach described in post #2 more rigorous than the approach of post #4.
If simplicity equates to a lack of rigour, then perhaps that's true!
 
  • Like
Likes Shreya and Delta2
  • #12
PeroK said:
If simplicity equates to a lack of rigour, then perhaps that's true!
Not exactly this, but yeah I too find your method more elegant but for some reason less rigorous.
 
  • Like
Likes Shreya
  • #13
Delta2 said:
90km/h but I don't know something doesn't look 100% rigorous with this,...
Far from rigorous.
I believe that is what the designer of the problem inplied, but who knows what differential speed is needed for that pop to happen?
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
  • #14
Lnewqban said:
Far from rigorous.
I believe that is what the designer of the problem inplied, but who knows what differential speed is needed for that pop to happen?
The bullet has a razor sharp tip such that balloon popping is ensured with the faintest of possible touches.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes PeroK, Delta2 and Shreya
  • #15
I think the question just asks for a lower limit of the speed.
But, when can't we take the minima of the 1st, 3rd or 4th function and get the right answer while the minima of the 2nd works?
 
  • #16
Shreya said:
I think the question just asks for a lower limit of the speed.
But, when can't we take the minima of the 1st, 3rd or 4th function and get the right answer while the minima of the 2nd works?
Sorry the 4 functions of u(t) are different and I guess they represent different things, are all represent the velocity of the bullet?
 
  • Like
Likes Shreya
  • #17
Shreya said:
I think the question just asks for a lower limit of the speed.
But, when can't we take the minima of the 1st, 3rd or 4th function and get the right answer while the minima of the 2nd works?
The second equation calculates the time, ##t##, for the bullet to hit the balloon:
$$ut -\frac 1 2gt^2 = (25 \ m/s)t + 125 \ m$$Which reduces to:
$$u = (25 \ m/s)t + \frac 1 2 gt + \frac{ 125 \ m}{t}$$You can look at this as ##u(t)## being function of the time taken, ##t##. And, by differentiating ##u(t)## you can actually find the minimum possible ##u##.

The other equations, I assume, are not calculating the time ##t## to hit the balloon. In any case, the other equations make no sense to me.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes Delta2 and Shreya
  • #18
Shreya said:
I think the question just asks for a lower limit of the speed.
Technically it is a threshold speed. Below this speed, the bullet does not hit the balloon. And, above this speed it does. Technically what happens precisely at the threshold speed is not really the issue.
 
  • Informative
Likes Shreya
  • #19
Yes they all represent the initial velocity of the bullet
This is how I got them.
 

Attachments

  • 20220515_191130.jpg
    20220515_191130.jpg
    27.6 KB · Views: 139
  • #20
The issue is that on finding the minima of u(t) - I get the right answer for only the 2nd equation. The other have no minima, as can be seen from the graph in OP
 
  • #21
Shreya said:
Yes they all represent the initial velocity of the bullet
... but only the second equation takes the motion of the balloon into account.
 
  • #22
Please explain that more @PeroK. I'm stuck there
 
  • #23
Perhaps the problem could have been reworded to ask for the minimum initial speed of the bullet to reach the balloon, the implication being that any speed higher than that would pop it. Setting that aside, I had some difficulty understanding this approach. Presumably, ##t## in the four equations in post #3 is not the usual independent variable but the catch-up time ##t_c## when the bullet reaches the balloon. That's OK.

The four equations in #3 were rearranged from the four equations in #1. What is not OK is the use of all four equations to find the minimum. That's because equations 3 and 4 in post #1 do not bring to the table anything new. They can be readily derived from the first two equations by eliminating one variable or another and all 4 equations are applicable to any problem where the acceleration is constant. In this particular problem substitutions of functional form for ##s## and ##v## and a number for ##a## adapt the equations to this particular problem, nevertheless equations 3 and 4 are still linearly dependent on 1 and 2. All one has to do, given post #3, is solve the first two equations as a system of 2 equations and two unknowns and ignore equations 3 and 4. This, by the way, is the traditional approach.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes Lnewqban, Shreya and PeroK
  • #24
Shreya said:
The issue is that on finding the minima of u(t) - I get the right answer for only the 2nd equation. The other have no minima, as can be seen from the graph in OP
One of your problems here is a sloppiness in notation that many books follow. We shouldn't really use ##t## for both the continuous variable of time and the fixed time of the collision. For this we should use ##t_0## or ##t_1## or ##T##.

An equation like ##v = u + at## is just a general equation for the velocity of the bullet. It carries no specific information about this problem.

The second equation, however, is an equation for ##T## the time to hit the balloon:
$$u = (25 \ m/s)T + \frac 1 2 gT + \frac{ 125 \ m}{T}$$That equation contains all the information about the problem: in particular the initial height and speed of the balloon. We would normally think of ##T## being a function of ##u##: choose an initial speed, ##u##, and (assuming it's large enough) we get some time ##T## of impact.

Turning this round, we can look at choosing an impact time ##T## and, assuming its short enough, we can find the initial speed that gives that impact time.

Then we notice that minimising the speed with respect to possible impact times solves the problem.

Your problem is that you applied some mathematics (function minimisation) without understanding how the function related to your physical problem. And I had to piece it all together for you!
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes malawi_glenn, jbriggs444 and Shreya
  • #25
kuruman said:
. In this particular problem substitutions of functional form for s and v and a number for a adapt the equations to this particular problem, nevertheless equations 3 and 4 are still linearly dependent on 1 and 2
I appreciate the traditional approach. I actually didn't use all 4 together - I tried to solve in 4 independent ways.
kuruman said:
Presumably, t in the four equations in post #3 is not the usual independent variable but the catch-up time tc when the bullet reaches the balloon
I am sorry I didn't mention that
 
  • #26
PeroK said:
One of your problems here is a sloppiness in notation that many books follow. We shouldn't really use t for both the continuous variable of time and the fixed time of the collision. For this we should use t0 or t1 or T.
I realize that - I shan't do it again.
PeroK said:
That equation contains all the information about the problem: in particular the initial height and speed of the balloon. We would normally think of T being a function of u: choose an initial speed, u, and (assuming it's large enough) we get some time T of impact.

Turning this round, we can look at choosing an impact time T and, assuming its short enough, we can find the initial speed that gives that impact time.

Then we notice that minimising the speed with respect to possible impact times solves the problem.
That makes much more sense now. I am sorry, but could you also explain why the 3rd & 4th equation lacks the essential information. (The question is actually one of many peers'; & I've got to answer them).

I appreciate how you guys can make a problem so much more intuitive.
 
  • #27
Shreya said:
I appreciate the traditional approach. I actually didn't use all 4 together - I tried to solve in 4 independent ways.
Let's analyse your last attempt. From ##v^2 - u^2 = 2as## you got:
$$u^2 = v^2 +2g(h_0 + v_b t)$$But, then you plugged in ##v = 25 \ m/s##, which destroys the minimisation approach - as this ##v## is a specific solution. Instead, you need to use ##v = u -gt## to get:
$$u^2 = u^2 -2ugt + g^2t^2 +2g(h_0 + v_bt)$$Hence:
$$2ugt = g^2t^2 + 2gv_bt + 2gh_0$$And:
$$u = \frac 1 2 gt + v_b + \frac{h_0}{t}$$Which is the same equation we got above. Again, it might be better to use ##T## to indicate the time of impact.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes Lnewqban and Shreya
  • #28
  • Like
Likes neilparker62, Lnewqban, Delta2 and 1 other person
  • #29
I did not contribute much other than trying to ensure balloon popping! But thanks for including me in the "credits" list all the same.!
 
  • Haha
Likes Delta2
  • #30
I didnt contribute much either, I think 95% of the thanks should go to Perok, Andrewkirk and Kuruman
 
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban
  • #31
PeroK said:
One of your problems here is a sloppiness in notation that many books follow. We shouldn't really use ##t## for both the continuous variable of time and the fixed time of the collision. For this we should use ##t_0## or ##t_1## or ##T##.

An equation like ##v = u + at## is just a general equation for the velocity of the bullet. It carries no specific information about this problem.

The second equation, however, is an equation for ##T## the time to hit the balloon:
$$u = (25 \ m/s)T + \frac 1 2 gT + \frac{ 125 \ m}{T}$$That equation contains all the information about the problem: in particular the initial height and speed of the balloon. We would normally think of ##T## being a function of ##u##: choose an initial speed, ##u##, and (assuming it's large enough) we get some time ##T## of impact.

Turning this round, we can look at choosing an impact time ##T## and, assuming its short enough, we can find the initial speed that gives that impact time.

Then we notice that minimising the speed with respect to possible impact times solves the problem.

Your problem is that you applied some mathematics (function minimisation) without understanding how the function related to your physical problem. And I had to piece it all together for you!
But t here(v=u+at) is still the same time taken for the bullet to reach the balloon,right? Also could you mention what information this equation is missing?
 
  • Like
Likes Shreya
  • #32
PeroK said:
Let's analyse your last attempt. From ##v^2 - u^2 = 2as## you got:
$$u^2 = v^2 +2g(h_0 + v_b t)$$But, then you plugged in ##v = 25 \ m/s##, which destroys the minimisation approach - as this ##v## is a specific solution. Instead, you need to use ##v = u -gt## to get:
$$u^2 = u^2 -2ugt + g^2t^2 +2g(h_0 + v_bt)$$Hence:
$$2ugt = g^2t^2 + 2gv_bt + 2gh_0$$And:
$$u = \frac 1 2 gt + v_b + \frac{h_0}{t}$$Which is the same equation we got above. Again, it might be better to use ##T## to indicate the time of impact.
Why does it work only when we keep v as u - gt ?
 
  • #33
Differentiate it said:
But t here(v=u+at) is still the same time taken for the bullet to reach the balloon,right? Also could you mention what information this equation is missing?
That equation applies to the bullet regardless of what the balloon is doing.
 
  • Informative
Likes Shreya
  • #34
PeroK said:
That equation applies to the bullet regardless of what the balloon is doing.
Whoops, my bad, that was a silly question 😅
What about the other question though?
 
  • #35
Differentiate it said:
Why does it work only when we keep v as u - gt ?
Because ##v = 25 \ m/s## implies the specific solution and determines ##u## and ##t##. These are then no longer continuous variables. If ##v = 25 m/s##, then ##u = 75 \ m/s## and ##t = 5 \ s## and there is no function to differentiate.
 
  • Informative
Likes Shreya
  • #36
PeroK said:
Because v=25 m/s implies the specific solution and determines u and t. These are then no longer continuous variables. If v=25m/s, then u=75 m/s and t=5 s and there is no function to differentiate.
Awesome! Does that mean that the equations we get in 3 & 4 doesn't describe the range of ##u##s and the corresponding ##t##s we can get, but only a specific situation.
Another Silly Question - then why do we still get a function (not a number)? And doesn't the lower values of u from 3 & 4 satisfy the conditions?
 
  • #37
neilparker62 said:
I did not contribute much other than trying to ensure balloon popping! But thanks for including me in the "credits" list all the same.!

Delta2 said:
I didnt contribute much either, I think 95% of the thanks should go to Perok, Andrewkirk and Kuruman
For a student who is self learning physics with no conventional teacher & only access to internet, and who has spent more than 3 hrs on this problem myself with no progress, anybody who has contributed is godlike
 
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban, neilparker62 and Delta2
  • #38
PeroK said:
Because ##v = 25 \ m/s## implies the specific solution and determines ##u## and ##t##. These are then no longer continuous variables. If ##v = 25 m/s##, then ##u = 75 \ m/s## and ##t = 5 \ s## and there is no function to differentiate.
But u and t are both unknown. u can be any value and t can be any value too, right?
 
  • #39
PeroK said:
That equation applies to the bullet regardless of what the balloon is doing.
Hm, but how does s = ut + (1/2)at^2 take the balloon's motion into account? s is the displacement of the bullet(displacement of the balloon from when the bullet is fired to when it hits the balloon is just 25t), u is the bullets initial velocity, and t is the time taken to hit the balloon
 
  • #40
Differentiate it said:
Hm, but how does s = ut + (1/2)at^2 take the balloon's motion into account? s is the displacement of the bullet(displacement of the balloon from when the bullet is fired to when it hits the balloon is just 25t), u is the bullets initial velocity, and t is the time taken to hit the
##v=u+at## just takes into account the fact that the bullet experiences deceleration and will have a final Velocity of ##v## later. It is too general and doesn't take into account the distance the bullet has to cover to pop the balloon (or anything regarding the situation), while ##s=ut+\frac{1}{2}at²## states that the bullet has to cover the required distance while experiencing deceleration.
Note that ##v=u+at## can be used for any object moving up against gravity and reaches the said ##v## - it doesn't have what we are looking for ie the bullet has to pop the balloon
 
  • Like
Likes Differentiate it
  • #41
Shreya said:
Awesome! Does that mean that the equations we get in 3 & 4 doesn't describe the range of ##u##s and the corresponding ##t##s we can get, but only a specific situation.
Another Silly Question - then why do we still get a function (not a number)? And doesn't the lower values of u from 3 & 4 satisfy the conditions?
Essentially you do get a number (really a quantity, as we have units involved). There's a difference between a fixed, as yet uncalculated quantity and a variable. To take a simple example.

We start with the simple equation relating displacement, constant velocity and time:
$$s = vt$$In general, all of these quantities may be variables. Note that there is a subtle difference between ##v##, which is an unknown, and ##s## and ##t## which are continuous variables.

In a single experiment, ##v## would be some fixed quantity throughout the experiment, while ##t## and ##s## vary.

If we consider varying ##v##, then we are considering many different experiments. This is the technique you tried to use for this problem. This is a valid approach, but you must be aware of what you are doing.

If we want to hit a target at a distance of ##10 \ m## then the speed and time are related by:
$$vT = 10 \ $$Which gives ##v## as a function of ##T## and vice versa. We can plot a graph of ##v## against ##T##. Note that I've been careful to use ##T## here to indicate that we have a fixed but unknown time ##T##. In any experiment we have a single ##v## and a single value for ##T##. This ##T## is not the same as the continuous variable ##t## that represents the passage of time.

In this case, there is no minimum of maximum, but we can still draw a graph of the function ##v(T) = \frac{10 \ m}{T}## or ##T(v) = \frac{10 \ m}{v}##.

Note that this is a function that represents many different experiments, with all the possible values of ##v##. In any given experiment, ##v## and ##T## are fixed (even if unknown) quantities.

Finally, if we assume that ## v = 5 \ m/s##, say, then we no longer have a function and ##T## must be ##2 \ s##. In this simple case, as soon as we choose either ##v## or ##T## then the function collapses to a single point on the graph. This is what happened above when you chose ##v = \ 25 m\s## as the final speed. You had then specified enough data to collapse the function relating ##u## and ##T## to a single point on the graph (##u = 75 \ m/s## and ##T = 5 \ s##). Even if you still had to calculate these numbers.

In particular, you no longer had a function ##u(T)## to do calculus on.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes Lnewqban and Shreya
  • #42
Differentiate it said:
But u and t are both unknown. u can be any value and t can be any value too, right?
No. Once you specify ##v = 25 \ m/s##, this fixes the values of ##u## and ##t##, even if you still have to calculate them.
 
  • Like
Likes Shreya
  • #43
Differentiate it said:
Hm, but how does s = ut + (1/2)at^2 take the balloon's motion into account?
Because you combine that equation for the bullet with the simultaneous equation for the motion of the balloon. If we do this formally, we have:
$$s = ut - \frac 1 2 gt^2$$and$$s_b = h_0 + v_bt$$And we set ##s = s_b## to get the equation relating the initial speed of the bullet and the time of impact:
$$uT - \frac 1 2 gT^2 = h_0 + v_bT$$This equation then contains all the information relating the initial speed of the bullet with the time of impact. Note that ##h_0## and ##v_b## are fixed quantities and not variables in this case.

Note that ##u, T## are variables here representing many different physical experiments. And we have a function relating them.

But, if we specify additionally the final speed of the bullet when it hits the balloon, then there is only one possible initial speed and one possible time. This is because if we fix ##v = u -gT = 25 \ m/s##, then we have another equation relating ##u## and ##T##. And the equation above reduces to:
$$u = 75 \ m/s \ \ \text{or} \ \ T = 5 \ s$$
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Shreya
  • #44
Essentially, the last 2 equations specify the final Velocity, thereby fixing ##u## & ##T##, even though they are unknown, they refer to one specific experiment. The graph has collapsed to a single point and is no longer differentiable. The value of ##u## still has to be calculated using simultaneous equations but has already been fixed on specifying ##v##. But on using ##u-gT## for ##v## I still refer to multiple experiments and multiple values of ##u## and ##t## and therefore I can use function minimization.
Please correct me if something is wrong
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK
  • #45
Shreya said:
Essentially, the last 2 equations specify the final Velocity, thereby fixing ##u## & ##T##, even though they are unknown, they refer to one specific experiment. The graph has collapsed to a single point and is no longer differentiable. The value of ##u## still has to be calculated using simultaneous equations but has already been fixed on specifying ##v##. But on using ##u-gT## for ##v## I still refer to multiple experiments and multiple values of ##u## and ##t## and therefore I can use function minimization.
Please correct me if something is wrong
Isn't there multiple values for u and t even though we fix v as 25?
We can still represent u as a function of t, it doesn't collapse it to a point
 
  • #46
Shreya said:
Essentially, the last 2 equations specify the final Velocity, thereby fixing ##u## & ##T##, even though they are unknown, they refer to one specific experiment. The graph has collapsed to a single point and is no longer differentiable. The value of ##u## still has to be calculated using simultaneous equations but has already been fixed on specifying ##v##. But on using ##u-gT## for ##v## I still refer to multiple experiments and multiple values of ##u## and ##t## and therefore I can use function minimization.
Please correct me if something is wrong
Isn't there multiple values for u and t even though we fix v as 25?
We can still represent u as a function of t, it doesn't collapse
 
  • #47
Differentiate it said:
Isn't there multiple values for u and t even though we fix v as 25?
We can still represent u as a function of t, it doesn't collapse it to a point
Yes, but let's not forget that the distance the balloon has to travel is fixed - and on fixing the final Velocity - the graph collapses to a single point which is (5,75)
Please correct me if I'm wrong
 
  • #48
Differentiate it said:
Isn't there multiple values for u and t even though we fix v as 25?
We can still represent u as a function of t, it doesn't collapse
No, it's fully constrained by specifying that it impacts the balloon at ##25 \ m/s##. There is only one physical solution for the initial speed (##u = 75 \ m/s##) and only one solution to the simultaneous equations.

You may be confusing the trajectory of the bullet, defined by ##s = ut - \frac 1 2 gt^2## and the relationship between the initial speed and the time at which the bullet hits the balloon: ##u(T)##.

It's critical to use different symbols (##t## and ##T##) for these concepts. Using the same symbol ##t## for both only works as long as you keep the concepts separate in your mind.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Shreya
  • #49
PeroK said:
No, it's fully constrained by specifying that it impacts the balloon at ##25 \ m/s##. There is only one physical solution for the initial speed (##u = 75 \ m/s##) and only one solution to the simultaneous equations.

You may be confusing the trajectory of the bullet, defined by ##s = ut - \frac 1 2 gt^2## and the relationship between the initial speed and the time at which the bullet hits the balloon: ##u(T)##.

It's critical to use different symbols (##t## and ##T##) for these concepts. Using the same symbol ##t## for both only works as long as you keep the concepts separate in your mind.
I don't understand...
Also, does a function have no minima if there's 2(or maybe more) minimum values? Because here u is minimum, s and t are maximum. Whereas v is minimum. But when you substitute in say u -gt for v, instead of to minimum variables u and v, you have only u.
And the function u(t) has a minima
If yes, why?
It's probably wrong, but could you explain it more? I don't get how u is fixed to 75 if I set v = 25.
 
  • #50
Differentiate it said:
I don't understand...
Also, does a function have no minima if there's 2(or maybe more) minimum values? Because here u is minimum, s and t are maximum. Whereas v is minimum. But when you substitute in say u -gt for v, instead of to minimum variables u and v, you have only u.
And the function u(t) has a minima
If yes, why?
It's probably wrong, but could you explain it more? I don't get how u is fixed to 75 if I set v = 25.
I can't explain it more until you start using ##T## when you mean the time of impact for a given ##u##.
 
Back
Top