• Support PF! Buy your school textbooks, materials and every day products Here!

A question on Dimensional analysis

  • Thread starter Amio
  • Start date
  • #1
27
0
This is actually an example from Physics for Scientists and Engineers by Serway. I am confused about the way they solved it.

Homework Statement



Suppose we are told that acceleration a of a particle moving with uniform speed v in a circle of radius r is proportional to some power of r, say r^m, and some power of v, say v^m. Determine the values of n and m and write the simplest form of an equation for the acceleration.

Homework Equations



The problem is solved in the book. But I dont understand the solution properly.This problem was solved in the example as below:

[tex]a = k(r^n)(v^m)[/tex][tex]L/T^2 = (L^n)(L/T)^m = L^{n+m}/T^m[/tex][tex]n+m = 1 [/tex][tex] m = 2[/tex][tex]n = -1[/tex][tex]a = kr^{-1}v^2[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



From the question we don't know if k has any dimension or not. So how did they (in the second line) write [tex]L/T^2=(L^n)(L/T)^m ?[/tex] Where did the k go??
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Nathanael
Homework Helper
1,650
239
k is by definition dimensionless. It's the constant of proportionality (meaning it's a constant that changes it from being "proportional" to being "equal")


The definition of "a" being proportional to "b" is a=kb where k is some constant (hence it's a pure, dimensionless, number)
 
Last edited:
  • #3
27
0
OOPPss... Suddenly I understand. k is not anything like length mass or time, right? Maybe thats the reason why they left out k?
 
  • #4
27
0
Wait, I have another question. In law of gravitation we know F = GmM/r^2 Here G is a proportionality constant, isn't it? Then how come it is not a pure number (ie it has units like) 6.67×10^−11 N·(m/kg)2 ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
Nathanael
Homework Helper
1,650
239
OOPPss... Suddenly I understand. k is not anything like length mass or time, right? Maybe thats the reason why they left out k?
Correct it's a unitless number. (I think such a number is ofted called a "pure number")

EDIT:
Wait, I have another question. In law of gravitation we know F = GmM/r^2 Here G is a proportionality constant, isn't it? Then how come it is not a pure number (ie it has units like) 6.67×10^−11 N·(m/kg)2 ?
Good question. I don't know a satisfactory answer. It seems I was wrong when I said "k is by definition dimensionless," I suppose it doesn't necessarily have to be dimensionless.

(Which of course brings us back to your original question, how do we know k is dimensionless in your original post?)

Sorry about the misinformation, I'm not sure why it must be dimensionless in your OP.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Nathanael
Homework Helper
1,650
239
Perhaps it's because they asked for "the simplest form of an equation for the acceleration."

(Or perhaps it's just to avoid the infinite possibility that comes with k being of choose-able units)
 
  • #7
27
0
Perhaps it's because they asked for "the simplest form of an equation for the acceleration."
It never seems to be the case. Serway's book describes it as a general procedure. Here is the excerpt from Serway's book:(as this page can be previewed in amazon; I think it never breaks any copyright)

Y3YP2Rd.png


Now this certainly works for x ∞ (a^n)(t^m); but what happens when we apply this for, say - the law of gravitation? Here, F ∞ Mm/r^2 certainly doesn't pass the test of dimensional analysis (?). I am confused!
 
  • #8
SteamKing
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
12,796
1,667
It never seems to be the case. Serway's book describes it as a general procedure. Here is the excerpt from Serway's book:(as this page can be previewed in amazon; I think it never breaks any copyright)

Y3YP2Rd.png


Now this certainly works for x ∞ (a^n)(t^m); but what happens when we apply this for, say - the law of gravitation? Here, F ∞ Mm/r^2 certainly doesn't pass the test of dimensional analysis (?). I am confused!
Well, why don't you apply dimensional analysis to the law of gravitation? Hint: not every constant of proportionality is unitless, like the π in A = π r[itex]^{2}[/itex] for the area of a circle. And besides, 'constant' means the value doesn't change; it doesn't mean there are no units.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #9
27
0
Thanks.
So I conclude - dimensional analysis works for equations; but it will work for proportionality only if the constant is unit less. (The book was a bit confusing.)
 

Related Threads on A question on Dimensional analysis

Replies
2
Views
337
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Top