Cool classical physics proof I came up with today

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a self-developed proof related to classical physics concepts, specifically focusing on equations of motion and their validity under different conditions. Participants explore the implications of constant versus variable acceleration and the use of calculus in deriving motion equations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant shares a PDF containing their proof, indicating it was developed independently with basic physics knowledge.
  • Another participant points out that a specific equation for average velocity is incorrect unless acceleration is constant, suggesting a calculus-based approach for a more accurate result.
  • A third participant agrees with the previous correction, emphasizing that the average velocity expression is only valid under linear acceleration and proposes an integral approach to find distance.
  • The original poster expresses gratitude for the feedback and acknowledges their recent introduction to calculus, noting they have not yet learned integration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus, as there are multiple competing views regarding the validity of the equations presented and the methods for deriving them. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the correctness of the original proof.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the original poster's lack of knowledge in integration, which affects their ability to fully understand the corrections provided. The discussion also highlights the dependence on the assumption of constant acceleration for certain equations.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in classical mechanics, the application of calculus in physics, and those exploring the nuances of motion equations may find this discussion relevant.

realfuzzhead
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Check out this pdf on this website. No signing up or anything, It took me the better half of today to do this. Anyways, this might be well known for people above my basic physics knowledge, but I came up with this all by myself knowing a few simple equations


http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/3569845/fun-with-physics-pdf-february-18-2012-7-59-am-579k?da=y
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Equation 1. on page 6 is wrong.

[tex]V_{avg} = \frac {V_0 + V} {2}[/tex]

is only valid if the acceleration is constant.

The right result is easy to find with calculus by integrating v = (v_0 + at + (1/2)Jt^2).
The distance is equal to the area under this curve.
(of course Archimedes found the area under a parabola in the 3rd century BC without calculus)
 
That's pretty good! Unfortunately an error creeps in on page 5: I will use your numbering...

p5,1) This expression for Vave is only true when V is increasing linearly i.e. when its acceleration is constant.

p5,3) Again because acceleration is not constant this is not the right equation. Instead we need [itex]D = D_0 + \int V(t)dt[/itex]. From what you have written I am not sure if you have come across integration yet: if not, it is enough to know for now that it is the inverse of differentiation.

Now we already have [itex]V(t) = V_0 + A_0t + \frac 1 2 Jt^2[/itex], integrating this we have [itex]D(t) = D_0 + V_0t + \frac 1 2 A_0t^2 + \frac 1 6 Jt^3[/itex].

Note that we can check this by differentiation:
[tex]\begin{align}D(t) &= D_0 + V_0t + \frac 1 2 A_0t^2 + \frac 1 6 Jt^3 \\<br /> V(t) &= \frac d{dt} D(t) = V_0 + A_0t + \frac 1 2 Jt^2 \\<br /> A(t) &= \frac d{dt} V(t) = A_0 + Jt \\<br /> \frac d{dt} A(t) &= J\end{align}[/tex]
 
THANK YOU GUYS! Damnit.. I thought that last part was a little bit to easy. I just started calculus this week so I have not learned integration yet..
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
9K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K