Can Acceleration be Both Positive and Negative Simultaneously?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter calculus_jy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Negative Positive
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical exploration of acceleration defined by the equation a = 1 + ln(x) and its implications for velocity, particularly whether velocity can be proven to be greater than zero for t > 0. Participants engage with concepts from calculus and the work-energy theorem while attempting to clarify the conditions under which these relationships hold.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the equation for acceleration and attempts to derive a relationship for velocity, expressing uncertainty about how to mathematically prove that v > 0 for t > 0.
  • Another participant asserts that the acceleration a = dv/dt is positive since 1 + ln(x) is greater than a certain value, but does not clarify the conditions under which this holds.
  • Several participants challenge the mathematical steps taken, particularly regarding the integration of ln(x) and the application of the work-energy theorem, suggesting alternative approaches to derive the relationship for velocity.
  • There is a discussion about the range of ln(x) and its implications for the positivity of acceleration, with one participant arguing that since v^2 must be positive, x must be greater than or equal to 1, which affects the sign of a.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about solving the differential equation related to the motion described, indicating a lack of consensus on the approach to take.
  • Another participant acknowledges a mistake in their calculations regarding the integral of ln(x), highlighting the collaborative nature of the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the mathematical derivations and the implications of the acceleration function. There is no clear consensus on the correct approach to proving that v > 0 for t > 0, and several competing interpretations of the mathematical relationships are presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in their mathematical reasoning, including unresolved integration steps and assumptions about the behavior of logarithmic functions. The discussion reflects a range of interpretations regarding the conditions under which the derived relationships hold.

calculus_jy
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
given acceleration [tex]a = 1 + ln x[/tex]
i can find that [tex]\Delta v^2 = 2xlnx[/tex] and since it is given that when [tex]t = 0, x = 1,v = 0[/tex]
[tex]\therefore v^2 = 2xlnx[/tex]
however i have been asked to prove [tex]v > 0 \; when \;t > 0[/tex] and i have no idea how to explain it in mathematcial terms, can anyone please give any suggestion?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[tex]a = \frac{dv}{dt} > 0[/tex] since 1+ ln x is greater than ...
 
I think your math is wrong calc_jy. Invoking work-energy theorem

[tex]v^2(x) - v^2(1) = 2\int_{1}^{x} a(s)ds \Rightarrow[/tex]

[tex]v^2(x) - 0 = 2\int_{1}^{x} (1+\ln s)ds \Rightarrow[/tex]

[tex]v^2 = 2(s + 1/s) |_{1}^{x} \Rightarrow[/tex]

[tex]v^2 = 2(x+1/x - 1 - 1) \Rightarrow[/tex]

[tex]v^2 = 2(x + 1/x - 2)[/tex]

But anyway you don't want that expression, just do what Gib said.
 
The integral of ln(x) is not 1/x. You have that backwards.
 
why is [tex]a\geq0[/tex] as lnx can range from -infinite to infinite and what working do i need to actually prove that v>0 as t>0
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that you want to solve this DE

I'm assuming that x is a function of t.

[tex]\frac{d^2x}{dt^2}=1+ln(x)[/tex]

For the life of me, I can't remember how to solve that. I'll look it up later.
 
DavidWhitbeck said:
I think your math is wrong calc_jy. Invoking work-energy theorem

[tex]v^2(x) - v^2(1) = 2\int_{1}^{x} a(s)ds \Rightarrow[/tex]

[tex]v^2(x) - 0 = 2\int_{1}^{x} (1+\ln s)ds \Rightarrow[/tex]

[tex]v^2 = 2(s + 1/s) |_{1}^{x} \Rightarrow[/tex]

[tex]v^2 = 2(x+1/x - 1 - 1) \Rightarrow[/tex]

[tex]v^2 = 2(x + 1/x - 2)[/tex]

But anyway you don't want that expression, just do what Gib said.

I'm not too sure about that working, but I do know for sure v^2 = 2x log (x) . We can see it after seeing a = d/d(x) [ v^2/2] , and then integrating both sides.

calculus_jy said:
why is [tex]a\geq0[/tex] as lnx can range from -infinite to infinite and what working do i need to actually prove that v>0 as t>0

Well, yes the function log x alone does have that range, but remember: v^2 = 2x log x. The quantity on the left side is positive. The quantity on the right hand side must also be positive. That means x must be greater than or equal to 1. Which means log x must be greater than zero, which means a = 1 + log x must also always be greater than 1.

a = dv/dt.

dv/dt is strictly positive. Also, t is a strictly positive quantity. Hence v is also > 0.
 
sennyk said:
The integral of ln(x) is not 1/x. You have that backwards.

My bad! That's a terrible mistake to make. Well in the bizarro world were all derivatives are antiderivatives and all functions are exponentials, I'd be fine... but as we live in the normal world my blunder was inexcusable.:blushing:
 
thanks !
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K