Calc-based conceptual problem with centripetal motion

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the mathematical interpretation of centripetal motion, specifically the behavior of velocity and acceleration vectors in polar coordinates. The acceleration of an object moving in a circle is defined as a = v²/r, where v is the constant speed and r is the radius. The user questions whether adding infinitesimal vectors results in a change in the velocity vector's magnitude, potentially contradicting the constancy of speed. The response clarifies that the correct approach involves using the Pythagorean Theorem for vector addition and emphasizes the importance of limits in calculus to derive the standard formula for centripetal acceleration.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of centripetal acceleration (a = v²/r)
  • Familiarity with vector addition in polar coordinates
  • Basic knowledge of differential calculus and limits
  • Concept of infinitesimals in calculus
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of centripetal acceleration using differential calculus
  • Learn about vector addition in polar coordinates and its implications
  • Explore the concept of limits in calculus and its application to motion
  • Investigate the relationship between discrete time and continuous motion in physics
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics and mathematics, educators teaching mechanics, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of motion and vector analysis.

Afterthought
Messages
29
Reaction score
2
Note: This is more of a math question than a physics question, but I'm posting it here since it's in the context of physics.

I've been thinking about the classic example of a ball attached to a string and moving at constant speed in a circle. The acceleration is v^2/r and always facing in the direction of the string. I've derived this result in the past before by breaking the acceleration into its x and y components and integrating to find v. In these coordinates the result is intuitive to me and makes sense.

However something bothers me about thinking of the problem using vectors in polar coordinates. At any given time, there is a velocity vector tangential to the circle, and the acceleration vector normal to it. At some infinitesimal moment later, there is an infinitesimally small velocity vector pointing the same direction as the acceleration, and it adds with the normal vector to create a new velocity vector. If a = v^/r, this new vector will be tangential to the next bit of the circle; this is why the object moves in a circle. However, the thing that bothers me is, that when you add these two vectors, shouldn't the resultant velocity vector be bigger than the original velocity vector, even if only by an infinitesimal amount? And in that case, wouldn't all the infinitesimal errors eventually add up, making the velocity vector no longer constant?

The only thing I could think of as to why this thinking is wrong is because when you add the vectors, you have to use the Pythagorean Theorem to find the new vector (as the vectors are normal), and that involves the square of dt, which does not integrate into any finite number. Is this reasoning correct?

If it is, I'd like to know to what extent thinking about infinitesimal vectors being added is relevant to the question whether time is continuous or discrete. In the case of centripetal motion, If time was discrete, would the magnitude of velocity vector change in a noticeable way after a long enough time?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Afterthought said:
If it is, I'd like to know to what extent thinking about infinitesimal vectors being added is relevant
That's an essential part of the derivation. You start with a finite step size (taking the acceleration over finite steps) and then take the limit, as the step size approaches zero (as with all differential calculus). That gives you the well known formula. It's a standard bit of book work. You will find it in any A level Mechanics textbook.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
753
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K