Elastic collision formulas -- Derivation blunder

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the derivation of elastic collision formulas and the challenges faced in eliminating the variable y from the equations. The user attempts to manipulate the equations to express x in terms of other variables but encounters inconsistencies in the results from different methods. Despite using WolframAlpha for verification, the derived values for x do not match when substituting specific arithmetic values. The complexity of the equations and the formatting issues hinder clear communication, leading to a request for improved presentation in future discussions. The thread has been closed for moderation due to these readability concerns.
luckis11
Messages
272
Reaction score
2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elastic_collision
μα+mβ=μx+my,
μα^2+mβ^2=μx^2+my^2
I want x in relation of all variables except y, therefore I need to replace-eliminate y:
μα+mβ=μx+my =>y=(μα+mβ-μx)/m
μα^2+mβ^2=μx^2+my^2=>y=((μα^2+mβ^2-μx^2)/m)^0.5
and it is eliminated if I equate these two parts of the two equalities with which y is equal to:
((μα+mβ-μx)/m)^2=(μα^2+mβ^2-μx^2)/m=>
(μα+mβ-μx)^2/m=μα^2+mβ^2-μx^2,
A=μα, Β=mβ, C=μx,
(A+B-C)^2=Α^2+ΑΒ-ΑC+AB+B^2-BC-AC-BC+C^2= Α^2+2ΑΒ-2ΑC+B^2-2BC+C^2=>
μ^2α^2+2μαmβ-2μαμx+m^2β^2-2mβμx+μ^2x^2=mμα^2+m^2β^2-mμx^2
so far wolframalfa answers x=(-m α + 2 m β + α μ)/(m + μ) which is the solution according to theory. But the last relation is equivalent with the trionym:
μ^2x^2+mμx^2-2μαμx-2mβμx+μ^2α^2+2μαmβ-mμα^2=0
A=μ^2+mμ, Β= -2αμ^2-2mβμ, C=μ^2α^2+2μαmβ-mμα^2,
Αx^2+Bx+C=0=>x=(-B+-(B^2-4AC)^0.5)/(2A)=>
x=(-(-2αμ^2-2mβμ)+-((-2αμ^2-2mβμ)^2-4(μ^2+mμ)(μ^2α^2+2μαmβ-mμα^2))^0.5)/
(2(μ^2+mμ))
And the latter equation is what also wolframalfa answers now!
And not only this does not seem how it can be factorized, but replacing arithmetic values:
(-m α + 2 m β + α μ)/(m + μ), m=2, α=3, β=5, μ=7=>35/9
(2*3*7^2+2*5*7*2+((-2*3*7^2-2*5*7*2)^2-4(7^2+7*2)(3^2*7^2-3^2*7*2+2*3*5*7*2))^0.5)/(2(2^2+2*7))=245/18≠35/9
(2*3*7^2+2*5*7*2-((-2*3*7^2-2*5*7*2)^2-4(7^2+7*2)(3^2*7^2-3^2*7*2+2*3*5*7*2))^0.5)/(2(2^2+2*7))=21/2≠35/9
whereas:
(7^2)x^2+2*7*x^2-2*49*3x-2*2*5*7*x+49*3^2+2*7*3*2*5-2*7*3^2=0=>x=35/9
Where is the mistake?
 
  • Wow
Likes PeroK
Physics news on Phys.org
unreadable...
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
Arjan82 said:
unreadable...
Agreed. Thread closed for Moderation...
 
Thread will remain closed. I have asked the OP to start a new thread using the "LaTeX Guide" link below the edit window, and pay attention to good paragraph structure and whitespace.
 
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...
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/
Back
Top