Acceleration perpendicular to velocity in 2D

AI Thread Summary
If acceleration is constant and perpendicular to velocity, the object's speed remains constant, indicating circular motion. This is due to the centripetal acceleration, which maintains a constant radius and speed. When acceleration is not constant, speed may change, depending on the direction and magnitude of the forces involved. The work-kinetic energy theorem supports this, as work done on the system is zero when force and velocity are perpendicular, resulting in unchanged kinetic energy. Therefore, the relationship between acceleration and velocity is crucial in determining speed consistency.
tmpr
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
If the magnitude of acceleration is constant, and acceleration is perpendicular to velocity, is speed constant? Also, is speed not constant when the magnitude of acceleration is not constant? How would I show this?

I tried to do this:

If position is p(t)=(x(t),y(t)), then velocity is p'(t)=(x'(t),y'(t)) and acceleration is p''(t)=(x''(t),y''(t)). If the magnitude of acceleration is constant, |p''(t)|=k. If acceleration and velocity are perpendicular, p'(t) \cdot p''(t) = x'(t)x''(t) + y'(t)y''(t) = 0.

But I'm stuck here.

How do I show |p'(t)|=c for some constant?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If the acceleration is perpendicular that means your object is moving in a circular path. So there is a centripetal force and hence acceleration acting.

a=v2/r, so 'a' and 'r' are constants.
 
rock.freak667 said:
If the acceleration is perpendicular that means your object is moving in a circular path. So there is a centripetal force and hence acceleration acting.

a=v2/r, so 'a' and 'r' are constants.

OK, but can you show me how you would deduce the fact that the object is moving with circular motion, given the assumption that acceleration is perpendicular to velocity?
 
tmpr said:
OK, but can you show me how you would deduce the fact that the object is moving with circular motion, given the assumption that acceleration is perpendicular to velocity?

Force is in the direction of acceleration, meaning that normally the acceleration and velocity would lie in the same plane. As far as I know, the only time acceleration is perpendicular to velocity is during circular motion.
 
Assuming that there is no external forces other than the one causing the acceleration.

Use the work-kinetic energy theorem:

In that case:

\Delta T =- \Delta W = -\int \vec{F}\cdot d\vec{r}

From here you should be able to show that T doesn't change if a is always perpendicular to the velocity of the particle (write dr=v(t)dt), and thus speed stays the same.
 
Last edited:
If acceleration and velocity are perpendicular:
a1v1+a2v2=0
but that is nothing else than the time derivative of v2, that is speed is costant whenever a and v are perpendicular.

But I like G01 explanation. It focus on the physics of the system.
If force and velocity are perpendicular (forse perpendicular to the direction of motion), work made on the system is zero, which implies that the kinetic energy (and so speed) is costant.
 
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top