Derivative of (v)^2 with respect to position

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the application of the chain rule in physics, specifically regarding the derivative of v^2 with respect to position. The user seeks clarification on their method of using the chain rule to derive acceleration from velocity, ultimately confirming that their approach is valid. They demonstrate the relationship between acceleration, velocity, and position through the chain rule, arriving at the conclusion that both methods of derivation are correct. Participants agree that while there are limited ways to apply the chain rule in this context, the fundamental principles remain consistent. The conversation reinforces the importance of understanding the underlying reasoning behind the chain rule in physics equations.
TheWonderer1
Messages
88
Reaction score
1
I forgot where I came across this and why I got so determined to figure it out but I wanted to ask about this d/dx(v^2) business.

My question is to solidify my understanding of the chain rule with physics equations (sorry for crap terminology). Therefore, I know I use it and do the math as
d(v^2)/dv * dv/dx = 2v x dv/dx = 2 dx/dt * dv/dx= 2 dv/dt = 2a. I just sort of do that automatically but I’m unsure of the “why”.

Basically, if possible, could you explain to me the chain rule being used for these sort of equations? I understand the use for something like the derivative of (3x+1)^7 = 21(3x+1)^6.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's easier to see what's going on if you go backwards from what you have. The definitions of velocity and acceleration are
$$v=\frac{dx}{dt}~;~~~a=\frac{dv}{dt}$$
Apply the chain rule
$$a=\frac{dv}{dt}=\frac{dv}{dx} \frac{dx}{dt}=v\frac{dv}{dx}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dx}(v^2)$$Does this make sense?
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker, vanhees71 and lekh2003
It is clear. So I think I used the chain rule correctly in my case. I know I got to the right answer just want to be sure my reasoning was on point and I didn’t misuse the chain rule.

Could I have done the chain rule differently? Just trying to get further concrete understanding.
 
TheWonderer1 said:
Could I have done the chain rule differently?
You did do it differently. You started from d(v2)/dx and you showed that it is equal to 2a. I started from a and showed that it is equal to (1/2)d(v2/dx. Both ways are equally correct and lead to the same equation.
 
Oops, to ask my question more explicitly we have two ways are there other ways?
 
TheWonderer1 said:
Oops, to ask my question more explicitly we have two ways are there other ways?
I can't think of any. You have to start from the definition of the acceleration and there is a limited choice of what to do next if you want to introduce the velocity in the expression and use the chain rule.
 
For fun I was trying to use energy considerations to determine the depth to which a solid object will sink in a fluid to reach equilibrium. The first approach that I tried was just to consider the change in potential energy of the block and the fluid as the block is lowered some unknown distance d into the fluid similar to what is shown in the answer to this post. Upon taking the limit as the vessel's cross sectional area approaches infinity I have an extra factor of 2 in the equilibrium...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
This is just to share some teaching experience. A problem about trajectory of a projectile in the atmosphere is very well known. The trajectory has a vertical asymptote. This fact is easy to obtain by using the stability theory. Consider equations of motion. Let ##\boldsymbol v=v_x\boldsymbol e_x+v_y\boldsymbol e_y## be the velocity of the projectile relative the standard Earth fixed frame ##xy## with ##y## directed upwards. The second Newton ##m\boldsymbol {\dot v}=m\boldsymbol g-\gamma...