Collision between two moving objects (one with a non-known trajectory)?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the collision point between two moving objects, A and B, where A's trajectory is known, but B's direction is variable. The initial approach involves calculating the distance between A and B, determining the time to collision through iterative distance adjustments, and refining the estimate until it converges on a collision point. The user expresses dissatisfaction with the complexity of their method and seeks a more precise solution, potentially using the law of sines to simplify the calculations. They also consider the practical implications of their findings regarding the relationship between the objects' velocities and the time to collision. Overall, the conversation highlights the challenges of accurately predicting collisions in dynamic systems.
Iximeow
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Alright, I've been working on this on my spare time for the past few weeks, and have a solution that ~works~, but I'm not happy with at all.

The general idea is to have two objects, A and B, where A's velocity and position are known, B's position and speed are known, but the direction B travels in can vary. I want to find where and when the two objects will collide, before even considering if it can happen at all.

Going to type out my math as it's simpler than just explaining it all in Engrish.

Ax, Bx = A's x-position, B's x-position
Ay, By = similarly, A's y-position, B's y-position
Avx, Avy = A's x-velocity, y-velocity

||B|| = B's speed

My solution thus far has been to find the distance from B to A, D1: sqrt({Bx-Ax}^2+{By-Ay}^2)

Then taking ||B||, and dividing D1 by it, giving T1 = D1/||B||

Then finding the distance from B to A(T1), D2: sqrt({Bx-Ax-Avx*T1}^2+{By-Ay-Avy*T1}^2)

Again, distance divided by ||B||, gives a better distance to correct for: T2 = D2/||B||

Then finding D3: sqrt({Bx-Ax-Avx*T2}^2+{By-Ay-Avy*T2}^2)

etc etc continuing on until Tn gets sufficiently small that I don't need to get closer, then having Tn and A(Tn), knowing that A(Tn) is close enough to the collision point I'm looking for. Initially, before I did the math, I was hoping to get something that I could use a limit for as n -> infinity, and get a precise answer, but from the way the math expands.. I'm pretty sure I can't do that?

If anyone knows what I may or may not be doing wrong, or a better way of finding this, I'd love you forever? :D
 
Physics news on Phys.org
... Don't mind me; reworking an idea I had a while back to use the law of sines gave a good answer.

Setting up a triangle with A and B's position as vertices, the collision point C as the third vertex, then knowing that AC = Bv*t, BC = Av*t, and easily finding the angle by A, and using the law of sines to know sin(A)/(Bv*t) = sin(B)/(Av*t). The t drops out, and then the angle by B is simple to find, which makes the problem into finding the intersection of two lines, and a bit more simple math to find how long it takes for one of the two objects to get to C.

Yay, precise answers. Now just wondering if AB/t has any real-world meaning or use.. hmm...
 
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...
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