Average Velocity: Initial & Final Velocities vs. Mean Value Theorem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the formula for average velocity as the sum of initial and final velocities divided by two, with uncertainty about a specific step in the derivation. An alternative approach is proposed, suggesting that calculating velocity at every instant and summing these values leads to the integral of the velocity function, which aligns with the Mean Value Theorem for Integrals. The relationship between average velocity and displacement over time is emphasized, reinforcing that average velocity is the vector difference in displacement divided by the time interval. The validity of both methods for deriving average velocity is questioned. Overall, the conversation explores different mathematical approaches to understanding average velocity.
Ali Asadullah
Messages
99
Reaction score
0
In the photo attached, i have tried to derive the formula that average velocty is equal to the sum of initial and final velocities divided by two. But i am not sure about one step encircled in the photo. I don't know whether encircled step is right or wrong. I have another idea of deriving this formula which is similar to this but skips this step.
I assumed that we calculate velocities after each one second, but if we suppose that we somehow calculate velocity after each instant then sum of velocities will gives us the integral of velocity function and dividing it by "n" will give us average velocity according to Mean Value Theorem for Integrals.
My question is whether my second appraoch is right?
 

Attachments

  • Baig1234.jpg
    Baig1234.jpg
    28 KB · Views: 592
Physics news on Phys.org
Average velocity is equal to the vector difference in displacement divided by the time interval
 
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?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top