Acceleration, and displacement

AI Thread Summary
Displacement can be negative depending on the chosen sign convention, which also applies to acceleration as a vector. Acceleration is defined as the change in velocity over time (Δv/Δt), and a negative acceleration indicates the direction of the acceleration vector, not its magnitude. The discussion highlights that using Δx/(Δt)² can lead to incorrect conclusions, particularly in scenarios with constant velocity. Understanding acceleration as a derivative of velocity provides a clearer and more intuitive framework. The conversation emphasizes the importance of context and conventions in physics when interpreting vector signs.
jaja1990
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
I think we can't have a negative displacement. Is that right?

Acceleration: the change in displacement / change in time squared
Since displacement can't be negative, and time can't be negative, acceleration also can't be negative.
But I know (it's in the books) that when we have decreasing acceleration, it's negative. How is that?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jaja1990 said:
I think we can't have a negative displacement. Is that right?
Why do you think this? Realize that whether a vector is negative or not just depends on the sign convention used when specifying its components.
Acceleration: the change in displacement / change in time squared
Better to think of acceleration as Δv/Δt.
Since displacement can't be negative, and time can't be negative, acceleration also can't be negative.
Again, the sign of a vector is rather arbitrary.
But I know (it's in the books) that when we have decreasing acceleration, it's negative. How is that?
Acceleration is a vector. A negative acceleration just means that the acceleration vector points in the negative direction. For example, if you take up as positive, the acceleration of a falling body will be negative.
 
Doc Al said:
Why do you think this? Realize that whether a vector is negative or not just depends on the sign convention used when specifying its components.

Better to think of acceleration as Δv/Δt.

Again, the sign of a vector is rather arbitrary.

Acceleration is a vector. A negative acceleration just means that the acceleration vector points in the negative direction. For example, if you take up as positive, the acceleration of a falling body will be negative.
I understand now, it's the direction that is negative, not the magnitude.

Why is it better to think of acceleration as Δv/Δt?
I guess it just a matter of which is more intuitive/elegant, but maybe there is another reason; is there?
 
Acceleration is the derivative of the velocity so it's dv/dt.

The sign of the acceleration can have different criteria, I think an acceleration is negative if the scalar product (dv/dt)•v < 0 and positive if (dv/dt)•v > 0. If the scalar product it's zero then the acceleration is perpendicular to the motion. This is the case in circular motion, for example.
 
jaja1990 said:
Why is it better to think of acceleration as Δv/Δt?
I guess it just a matter of which is more intuitive/elegant, but maybe there is another reason; is there?
Well, Δv/Δt is the definition of acceleration (at least average acceleration).

Blindly using Δx/(Δt)2 can lead to silly results. Imagine something moving at a constant velocity of 10 m/s for 1 second. Δx = 10, Δt = 1. Obviously the acceleration is zero here, so that formula fails.
 
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...
Back
Top