Cp2.63 find the initial velocity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving the acceleration of a particle given by a specific equation. Participants are tasked with finding the initial velocity required for the particle to have the same x-coordinate at two different times, as well as determining the velocity at a later time. The scope includes mathematical reasoning and conceptual clarification related to kinematics.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related, Mathematical reasoning, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express uncertainty about how to begin solving the problem, indicating a lack of clarity on the first steps.
  • One participant suggests using the relationship between velocity and acceleration, stating that velocity is the "anti-derivative" of acceleration and distance is the "anti-derivative" of velocity.
  • Another participant points out that the acceleration can be simplified to 1.0 m/s², based on the given equation.
  • There is a question raised about the correctness of the acceleration equation, with one participant suggesting that the second term may require a time factor to make sense dimensionally.
  • Some participants discuss the implications of the units in the acceleration equation, with one stating that it does not make sense to add terms with different units.
  • A later reply proposes a potential correction to the acceleration equation, suggesting that the second term should include a time factor.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the interpretation of the acceleration equation, with some believing it is correct while others argue that it contains inconsistencies in units. The discussion remains unresolved as participants explore different interpretations and potential corrections.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the acceleration equation, particularly concerning the dimensional consistency of the terms involved. The discussion reflects varying levels of understanding and interpretation of the problem.

karush
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,240
Reaction score
5
cp2.63. The acceleration of a particle is given by
$$a(t)=-2.00 \, m/s^2 +3.00 \, m/s^3.$$
a. find the initial velocity $v_0$ such that the particle will have the same x-coordinate at $t=4.00\, s$ as it had at $t=0$.
b. What will be the velocity at $t=4.00 s$

ok sorry but I don't even know step one...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
karush said:
cp2.63. The acceleration of a particle is given by
$$a(t)=-2.00 \, m/s^2 +3.00 \, m/s^3.$$
a. find the initial velocity $v_0$ such that the particle will have the same x-coordinate at $t=4.00\, s$ as it had at $t=0$.
b. What will be the velocity at $t=4.00 s$

ok sorry but I don't even know step one...
Well, start from the beginning:
[math]v(t) - v(0) = \int_0^t a(t') ~ dt'[/math]

[math]x(t) - x(0) = \int_0^t v(t') ~ dt'[/math]

Once you get that then go ahead and set x(0) = x(4) and see what you need to have for v(0).

-Dan
 
I would think that "step one" would be to recognize that "-2.0 m/s2+ 3.0 m/s2" is just 1.0 m/s2! Then use, as Topsquark suggests, that velocity is the "anti-derivative" of acceleration and distance moved is the "anti-derivative" of velocity.
 
HallsofIvy said:
I would think that "step one" would be to recognize that "-2.0 m/s2+ 3.0 m/s2" is just 1.0 m/s2! Then use, as Topsquark suggests, that velocity is the "anti-derivative" of acceleration and distance moved is the "anti-derivative" of velocity.
so would it be this?
$\displaystyle \int_0^t v(t') ~ dt' =\int_0^4 t\, dt $
 
karush said:
cp2.63. The acceleration of a particle is given by
$$a(t)=-2.00 \, m/s^2 +3.00 \, m/s^3.$$
a. find the initial velocity $v_0$ such that the particle will have the same x-coordinate at $t=4.00\, s$ as it had at $t=0$.
b. What will be the velocity at $t=4.00 s$

ok sorry but I don't even know step one...

HallsofIvy said:
I would think that "step one" would be to recognize that "-2.0 m/s2+ 3.0 m/s2" is just 1.0 m/s2! Then use, as Topsquark suggests, that velocity is the "anti-derivative" of acceleration and distance moved is the "anti-derivative" of velocity.
Okay, I have to ask this, then, before we go further. Is the acceleration -2.00 m/s^2 + 3.00 m/s^3 or -2.00 m/s^2 + 3.00 m/s^2 ?

-Dan
 
ok let's drop this post there might be a typo in this..
 
I think the velocity is *actually* non-linear. I expect that there is a jerk in the progression of cause to effect. Likely the time is missing in the second term. With a time factor the particle will wibble and wobble.
The unit of the second term is $\text{m}/\text{s}^3$ after all.
 
Klaas van Aarsen said:
I think the velocity is *actually* non-linear. I expect that there is a jerk in the progression of cause to effect. Likely the time is missing in the second term. With a time factor the particle will wibble and wobble.
The unit of the second term is $\text{m}/\text{s}^3$ after all.

yes the OP equation is correct I looked up in the book

however not real sure how a plot of this would look like would
$y=-2x^2+3x^3$ on desmos give us the graph?

[DESMOS]advanced: {"version":7,"graph":{"showGrid":false,"xAxisStep":1,"squareAxes":false,"viewport":{"xmin":-1.481,"ymin":-1.718,"xmax":12,"ymax":1000}},"expressions":{"list":[{"type":"expression","id":"graph1","color":"#2d70b3","latex":"y=-2x^2+3x^3\\ \\left\\{0\\le x\\le6\\right\\}"}]}}[/DESMOS]
 
Last edited:
karush said:
yes the OP equation is correct I looked up in the book

It cannot be correct.
It says:
$$a(t)=-2.00 \, \text{m}/\text{s}^2 +3.00 \, \text{m}/\text{s}^3$$
But we cannot add $\text{m}/\text{s}^2$ to $\text{m}/\text{s}^3$.
It does not make sense to split the terms like that either.

Likely it should be:
$$a(t)=-2.00 \, m/s^2 +3.00 \, m/s^3\cdot t$$
 
  • #10
ok let's work with that
its basically a learning problem anyway

so is the reason you do not have t in the first term is bc that is the acceleration at t=0
 
  • #11
Klaas van Aarsen said:
It cannot be correct.
It says:
$$a(t)=-2.00 \, \text{m}/\text{s}^2 +3.00 \, \text{m}/\text{s}^3$$
But we cannot add $\text{m}/\text{s}^2$ to $\text{m}/\text{s}^3$.
It does not make sense to split the terms like that either.

Likely it should be:
$$a(t)=-2.00 \, m/s^2 +3.00 \, m/s^3\cdot t$$
Unless the "3" carries units of distance. I've seen this "unit drop" often when moving Physics concepts to Mathematics.

-Dan
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K