Dimensions in logarithms after integration

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the integration of the equation v = 1/kt, where the integration leads to a logarithmic expression with a dimensional argument, which is problematic. It highlights the issue that the function is undefined at t=0, complicating the use of initial conditions in the integration process. The participants emphasize the necessity of using definite integrals to avoid undefined behavior and to ensure that arguments of logarithmic functions remain dimensionless. They argue that physical models cannot rely on indefinite integrals without proper initial and final conditions. Ultimately, the conversation underscores the importance of correctly defining boundaries in physical equations to maintain dimensional consistency.
quantum13
Messages
65
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Let v = 1 / kt

v = m/s
k = 1/m
t = s

v = dx/dt so dx = dt / kt

integrating,

x = ln (kt)/k + C

However the argument of a logarithm is dimensionless. But an integration is a perfectly normal thing to do. So how come this integration results in a dimensional logarithm argument?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is constant C? Doing it right gives you

x=\int^{t_1}_{t_2}\frac{dt}{kt}=\frac{1}{k}(ln(t_2)-ln(t_1))=\frac{1}{k}ln\left(\frac{t_2}{t_1}\right)

The argument of the natural log is dimensionless as it should be.
 
d'oh the summer makes me forget even how to do basic integrals

but what if you do the integral in a non-definite way and use the constant C turning it into an initial value problem

dx = dt / kt
x = ln(t) / k + C
and use t=0, x=x0

but with this way i get ln(0), so how do i figure out C?

i know I am making some mistake but i can't seem to figure it out..
 
I want to know v_{t=0}=?
in your model k!=constant!
 
quantum13 said:
d'oh the summer makes me forget even how to do basic integrals

but what if you do the integral in a non-definite way and use the constant C turning it into an initial value problem

dx = dt / kt
x = ln(t) / k + C
and use t=0, x=x0

but with this way i get ln(0), so how do i figure out C?

i know I am making some mistake but i can't seem to figure it out..

Your equation for velocity is undefined for t=0, so it's no surprise that the position is equally undefined there.

You can't solve it as an initial value problem because of the specific function. You end up with dimensions in the argument. You can't talk about a function f(t)=x of how much distance the particle has traveled since time t=0 because that specific integral diverges, so you must take the definite integral for f(t)=x and only speak of differences in this function for t>0

And since you can't take the definite integral of one side of the equation, and the indefinite integral of the other side, you must therefore take the definite integral of both.

For instance, if we define x(t=1) = x_0 as an initial condition, we avoid the whole thing about the function being undefined at our chosen initial value, but the function f(t)=x as specified by the indefinite integral is still poorly defined.

kx=\ln{t}+kC

(Note how in the next step, if we were to measure time in any other units, we would not receive \ln{1} but some other value!)

kx_0=\ln{1}+kC
C=x_0

x=\frac{kx_0+\ln{t}}{k}

Bringing both terms into the logarithm:
x=\frac{\ln{(e^{kx_0}\cdot t)}}{k}

And so our argument for the logarithm still has dimensions of time, which proves we made a serious mistake somewhere along the way.
 
quantum13 said:
but what if you do the integral in a non-definite way and use the constant C turning it into an initial value problem
...
In physics there are no indefinite integrals, if you think about it for a moment, because mathematical expressions model physical reality. To take a simpler case, suppose you want to solve v = dx/dt = constant, the simplest differential equation there is. You can immediately write the mathematical expression x = vt + C if you are doing "math". What does this mean physically?

Physically you would say, I know that the rate of change of position with respect to time is constant. To find the overall change of position I need to write its incremental change as

dx = v dt

and add all such increments. But how exactly are you going to add them? You need a starting and ending point for both position and time, so you say

\int^{x}_{x_0}dx=\int^{t}_{t_0}vdt

(x-x0)=v(t-t0)

The symbols represent the starting space-time point (x0, t0) and the ending space-time point (x, t) of the summation. When you write x = vt, the assumption is that (a) the clock that measures time starts when motion starts (t0=0) and (b) that the object is at the origin when the clock starts (x0=0). Just because they are swept under the rug does not mean that they are not or should not be there. To put it in a nutshell, any summation requires a starting and an ending point and if you really don't know what these are, then you cannot do the summation.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Struggling to make relation between elastic force and height'
Hello guys this is what I tried so far. I used the UTS to calculate the force it needs when the rope tears. My idea was to make a relationship/ function that would give me the force depending on height. Yeah i couldnt find a way to solve it. I also thought about how I could use hooks law (how it was given to me in my script) with the thought of instead of having two part of a rope id have one singular rope from the middle to the top where I could find the difference in height. But the...
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Back
Top