Drag in the x and y directions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hermes Chirino
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    drag
Hermes Chirino
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I'm reading this book on Classical Mechanics and there are two examples in the book where we are asked to find one expression for the velocity $v$, and one for the position $x$, both as functions of time for a particle moving in the x-direction in a "medium" where the drag force is proportional to $v$. We are also asked to find velocity and position in the y-direction, same medium, drag force propotional to $v$. They use differential equations methods to solve it. I don't have any trouble understanding their methods or how they got the equations; my question is on their premises.

For the x-direction, they use as premise:
$$ma_x=m\frac{dv}{dt}=-kmv_x$$

I understand the drag force $-kmv$ is equal in magnitude to the force $ma$, but opposite direction.

For the y-direction, they use as premise:
$$F_T=m\frac{dv}{dt}=-mg-kmv_y$$

I understand the total force is equal to the force of gravity $mg$, minus the drag force pointing in the opposite direction.

My question here is: Why they don't use a similar premise for the x-direction, something like:
$$F_T=ma_x-kmv_x$$

What is the diference ? What I am missing here ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hermes Chirino said:
For the x-direction, they use as premise:
$$ma_x=m\frac{dv}{dt}=-kmv_x$$
Shouldn't it be ##ma_x=m\frac{dv_x}{dt}=-kv_x## ?
Otherwise you're implying that deceleration due to drag would be independent of mass (but clearly feathers fall slower than heavy things).

Hermes Chirino said:
My question here is: Why they don't use a similar premise for the x-direction, something like:
$$F_T=ma_x-kmv_x$$
That is not similar to what they did in the y-direction. ##F_T## is, by definition, equal to ##ma_x## right? So what sense does this equation make?

In the y-direction they equated ##ma_y## with ##F_{net.y}## and in the x-direction they equated ##ma_x## with ##F_{net.x}##.
The y-direction just happens to have an extra force (gravity) that contributes to ##F_{net.y}##
 
Nathanael said:
Shouldn't it be ##ma_x=m\frac{dv_x}{dt}=-kv_x## ?
Otherwise you're implying that deceleration due to drag would be independent of mass (but clearly feathers fall slower than heavy things).That is not similar to what they did in the y-direction. ##F_T## is, by definition, equal to ##ma_x## right? So what sense does this equation make?

In the y-direction they equated ##ma_y## with ##F_{net.y}## and in the x-direction they equated ##ma_x## with ##F_{net.x}##.
The y-direction just happens to have an extra force (gravity) that contributes to ##F_{net.y}##
They use m, so when solving for the differential equation, the math comes a little bit easier, they mention in the book that we shouln't really too much on the mass, they use it only for mathematical purposes. I understand your point in the y direction, that gravity comes as an extra force, but when an object is in free fall, isn't gravity the only force?
 
Hermes Chirino said:
I understand your point in the y direction, that gravity comes as an extra force, but when an object is in free fall, isn't gravity the only force?

Only when things are falling in a vacuum.

Why do you think that a cannon ball and a feather dropped from the same height in air hit the ground at different times?
 
Hi, I had an exam and I completely messed up a problem. Especially one part which was necessary for the rest of the problem. Basically, I have a wormhole metric: $$(ds)^2 = -(dt)^2 + (dr)^2 + (r^2 + b^2)( (d\theta)^2 + sin^2 \theta (d\phi)^2 )$$ Where ##b=1## with an orbit only in the equatorial plane. We also know from the question that the orbit must satisfy this relationship: $$\varepsilon = \frac{1}{2} (\frac{dr}{d\tau})^2 + V_{eff}(r)$$ Ultimately, I was tasked to find the initial...
The value of H equals ## 10^{3}## in natural units, According to : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_units, ## t \sim 10^{-21} sec = 10^{21} Hz ##, and since ## \text{GeV} \sim 10^{24} \text{Hz } ##, ## GeV \sim 10^{24} \times 10^{-21} = 10^3 ## in natural units. So is this conversion correct? Also in the above formula, can I convert H to that natural units , since it’s a constant, while keeping k in Hz ?
Back
Top