Calculating Work Between Two Points on a Line – Simple Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Master J
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Line Work
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the work between two points on a line, specifically points A(1, 0, 0) and B(0, 1, (pi^3)/8). The parametric equation for the line connecting these points is correctly expressed as r = i + t(-i + j + [(pi^3)/8]k). Participants confirm that substituting t = 0 yields point A and t = 1 yields point B, validating the equation's correctness. The vector from point B to point A is derived by subtracting the position vector of A from that of B. The conversation clarifies the confusion regarding the position vector and the derivation of the line's equation.
Master J
Messages
219
Reaction score
0
Simple question.

So in an example question I'm lookin at finding the work between 2 points on a line.

The points are A(1, 0, 0) and B(0, 1, (pi^3)/8)

The vector of the line joining these points is then given as:

r = i + t(-i + j + [(pi^3)/8]k )


Is that correct? I can't see how that equation arises? It could just be a typo, or I'm just having a stupid day!

Cheers!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, that's the parametric equation of the (straight) line connecting those points. Taking different values of t in the range [0,1] gives you different points along that line.
 
Yes, but is it correct? Shud there be a -i in there?

Is it r = a + tb ?
 
It looks OK to me. Substitute t = 0 and you get point A. Substitute t = 1 and you get point B. In unit vector notation,

\vec A = 1 \hat i + 0 \hat j + 0 \hat k

\vec B = 0 \hat i + 1 \hat j + \frac{\pi^3}{8} \hat k
 
I guess I'm confused as to that vector. How do you make that position vector from those 2 points?
 
The vector from B to A is simply
\vec{B} - \vec{A}
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
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