Derive 1-dimensional motion from average acceleration (no calculus)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the equation for one-dimensional motion using average acceleration without calculus. It begins with the definition of average acceleration as the change in velocity over time and establishes the relationship between initial and final velocities under constant acceleration. The average velocity is calculated as the mean of initial and final velocities, leading to the equation for displacement. The derived formula incorporates initial position, average velocity, and time to express displacement. The thread emphasizes understanding these concepts through algebraic manipulation and graphical representation of velocity versus time.
Gaebril
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Starting with the expressions for average acceleration (Change in Velocity over Change in time), average velocity at constant acceleration; algebraically (NO CALCULUS) derive the equation for one-dimensional motion that relates displacement to the acceleration, assuming acceleration is constant.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sketch a graph of velocity vs. time and calculate the area under the graph.

s=vt

You can start v0 at any point and vf too.
 
It can be derived based on the fact that with constant acceleration, for any time period, the average velocity during that time period is 1/2 the sum of the initial and final velocity.

v0 = initial velocity
v1 = final velocity
v1 = v0 + at

average velocity = 1/2 (v0 + v1) = 1/2 (v0 + (v0 + at) = v0 + 1/2 a t

distance = initial position + average velocity x time

x = x0 + (v0 + 1/2 a t) t = x0 + v0 t + 1/2 a t2
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
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...
Back
Top