Difference between jerk in accerlation and deceleration?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the concepts of jerk in relation to acceleration and deceleration, exploring their definitions and implications within the context of relativity. Participants examine the relationship between these terms and the mathematical derivatives associated with motion.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the experience of jerk is the same whether one is accelerating or decelerating, questioning the fundamental difference between the two.
  • Another participant states that deceleration is simply acceleration in the opposite direction, implying no essential difference exists.
  • A participant clarifies that jerk is defined as the third derivative of position, while acceleration is the second derivative, indicating a hierarchy of motion derivatives.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of higher derivatives in relativity, with one participant noting that they can lead to complications where no single answer may exist.
  • References to literature are provided, discussing the definitions of jerk and snap in the context of relativistic kinematics and the challenges associated with higher derivatives.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between acceleration and deceleration, with some asserting they are fundamentally the same while others explore the nuances of their definitions and implications. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of higher derivatives in relativity.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the complexities introduced by higher derivatives in relativity, noting that definitions may vary based on the context of motion and the frame of reference used.

Seminole Boy
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
Yes, I'm back to this Einstein jerk, but it's in an entirely different context. Please, mentors, do not close this until my problem is resolved.

Okay, when one accelerates, one feels the Einstein jerk (discussed midway through his book). When one decelerates, one feels the Einstein "jerk".

If space has no bounds, this means there is no real direction. The jerks are experienced "backwards" and "forwards", but that's essentially the same thing or the same "direction." Going "north" through spacetime is the same as going south, west, or east through spacetime. And the jerk the body experiences is the same whether it's done by acceleration or deceleration.

Okay. So how is acceleration any different from deceleration?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Deceleration is simply acceleration in the opposite direction, so it is not different at all.
 
Okay. Thank you. That's what I wasn't understanding. Mentors, feel free to close this. I should have just emailed you or the Great Peter Donis.
 
One more note: I notice you use the term jerk which has a specific meaning in acceleration.

While acceleration is the second derivative of position, jerk is the third derivative of position. Velocity is the first derivative of position. All with respect to time.

Interestingly higher than 3 derivatives start to give 'problems' in relativity, if I remember correctly things no longer commute in higher derivatives with a result that there is no single one answer.
 
Passionflower, now you're confusing me. You're saying there is some kind of position hierarchy?
 
Seminole Boy said:
Passionflower, now you're confusing me. You're saying there is some kind of position hierarchy?
When something starts to move there are actually an infinite number of higher derivatives, but usually scientists do not worry too much about higher derivatives than 2.
 
Passionflower said:
Interestingly higher than 3 derivatives start to give 'problems' in relativity, if I remember correctly things no longer commute in higher derivatives with a result that there is no single one answer.

I'd be interested in some examples/references... Not disagreeing, but curious.
 
I looked around if I could find something.

See for instance chapter 2.1 and 2.2 in "Relativistic Kinematics and Stationary Motions" where jerk and snap are defined. http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.4243

In chapter 7 it states:

In the instantaneous rest-frame one can define the proper jerk j as in non-relativistic mechanics, but the D-vector jerk should not be defined simply as the proper-time derivative of the D-acceleration because (i) it is not orthogonal to the D-velocity U, and hence may be timelike, and (ii) it does not vanish for worldlines of constant|A|.
...
In contrast to the notions of proper acceleration and proper jerk, there is an ambiguity in the definition of proper snap, arising from the fact that the triple derivative with respect to coordinate time t does not coincide in the instantaneous rest-frame with the triple derivative with respect to proper time, whereas there is a coincidence for single and double derivatives
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K