Can someone help me answer this question about work?

  • Thread starter Thread starter xphysics
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Work
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of work in physics, specifically the relationship between work defined as an integral of force and the simpler expression W = Fx for constant force. Participants explore the implications of varying forces and the mathematical representation of work through integrals.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the distinction between work calculated using W = Fx for constant forces and the integral approach for varying forces. Questions arise about the nature of the integral and the relationship between force and displacement.

Discussion Status

Some participants express a growing understanding of the concepts, particularly regarding the graphical representation of force and work. There is acknowledgment of the need for force to be expressed as a function of displacement for varying forces, and the discussion remains open with various interpretations being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity introduced by forces that depend on position and the challenges in calculating work for such cases. The conversation reflects an ongoing exploration of foundational physics concepts without a definitive resolution.

xphysics
Messages
21
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I've been watching calculus-based classical physics from MITcourseware just to learn physics. and I've been having this question that professor walter lewin did not address neither drphysicsa on youtube
the question is: knowing that W(from A to B)= the Integral of (F dx) and eventually u derive that you'll get change in kinetic energy ok i got that. But what is the different between that and W=Fx which is work=force times displacement?

there's also another equation that prof.WL addressed: dw=F(x.component)dx+F(y.component)dy+F(z.component)dz
and if you take the integral of that you get W by itself? so the rate of change of work is Force times displacement? isn't it just work itself?


Please help!

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
xphysics said:
the question is: knowing that W(from A to B)= the Integral of (F dx) and eventually u derive that you'll get change in kinetic energy ok i got that. But what is the different between that and W=Fx which is work=force times displacement?
W = Fx applies when the force is constant. For a varying force, you need the integral.

there's also another equation that prof.WL addressed: dw=F(x.component)dx+F(y.component)dy+F(z.component)dz
and if you take the integral of that you get W by itself? so the rate of change of work is Force times displacement? isn't it just work itself?
That's not the 'rate of change' of work, that's just work. Note that the integral is with respect to displacement, not time.
 
Just adding: dW is a small change in work, namely over a small change in path ds = [dx,dy,dz].
Work is the integral of dW over the path.

Now, dW = dF . ds
dW is a number and dF and ds are both vectors.
The only contribution of F to W is the part of F that is along the path ds. That's where the dw=F(x.component)dx+F(y.component)dy+F(z.component)dz expression comes from.

So a force in the y direction does not do work when the path is in the x direction. This is very important to understand.

As the doc says, W = Fx is for a very simple case: F constant and F in the same direction as the x. Then ∫ dF.ds from 0 to x is Fx ∫ dsx = Fx times x

Kudos for your curiosity and even more for asking good questions!
If you want more, more advanced, or more understandable explanations:
The reason the template has 2 and 3 is that it helps helpers provide assistance at a level that the asking person may understand. In this case there is no homework problem but a question to help understand.
Even more important to get help you can do something with.
 
Ahhhh ok i kinda understand it now actually i understand it a lot! I thought about it for a minute and i saw why:
If you graph F(x) with x as distance on the x-axis and F as force on the y-axis, and you apply a constant force on it, you just eventually get the amount of force times x to find the work so therefore we have the simple equation W=Fx? But if you make a graph with changing forces, you need to find the integral of that graph inable to find the work, and this is what confuse me again(sorry). In able to do that mathematically don't you need F with x as an independent variable instead of F=ma(a as an independent variable)?
 
uh-oh. Total applied Force is what causes mass to accelerate ; so in Newton's 2nd, "a" is the DEpendent variable.
Each individual force is caused by some external subject (spring via contact, Earth via gravity, rope via contact, pressure via contact) ... many of these forces ARE functions of location x , in a particular situation.
The ones that are not (viscous friction and drag, especially) are a real pain to deal with, because , yes, you can't calculate their Work until you can re-write their force dependence from F(v) => F(x) ... essentially you need to know v(x) to do this, which you can't until you know the viscous force. So you average and approximate, until you learn how to solve differential equations.
 
xphysics said:
Ahhhh ok i kinda understand it now actually i understand it a lot! I thought about it for a minute and i saw why:
If you graph F(x) with x as distance on the x-axis and F as force on the y-axis, and you apply a constant force on it, you just eventually get the amount of force times x to find the work so therefore we have the simple equation W=Fx?
Right. In that simple case the graph is a rectangle, so the integral is just Fx.

But if you make a graph with changing forces, you need to find the integral of that graph inable to find the work, and this is what confuse me again(sorry). In able to do that mathematically don't you need F with x as an independent variable instead of F=ma(a as an independent variable)?
Of course, to compute the work integral directly you would have to have the force as a function of x. (F = ma is something else.)
 
ahhh ok thank you guys i understand it now appreciate it
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K