Find magnitude of car's acceleration

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the acceleration of a car observed passing through an alley. The car's width is estimated at 4 meters, and it was visible for 0.5 seconds after starting from rest 2 seconds prior. Initial calculations led to a result of approximately 4.6 m/s², but further analysis suggested that using the correct equation, Δx = V_ox t + (1/2)a_x t², would yield a more accurate result around 3.6 m/s², which aligns with the book's vague answer of about 4. The conversation highlights confusion regarding the problem's clarity about whether the entire car or just a point was in view during the observation. Ultimately, the need for precise definitions in physics problems is emphasized to avoid misinterpretations.
Rijad Hadzic
Messages
321
Reaction score
20

Homework Statement


While strolling downtown on a Saturday afternoon you stumble across an old car show. As you are walking along an alley toward a main street, you glimpse a particularly stylish Alpha Romero pass by. Tall buildings on either side of the alley obscure your view, so you see the car only as it passes between the buildings. Thinking back to your physics class, you realize that you can calculate the cars acceleration. You estimate the width of the alley way between the two buildings to be 4 m. The car was in view for .5s. You also heard the engine rev when the car started from a red light, so you know the alpha romero started from rest 2s before you first saw it. Find the magnitude of its acceleration

Homework Equations


V_{ox} + a_xt = V_x
\Delta x = V_xt - (1/2) a_xt^2

The Attempt at a Solution


So since the car starts from 0 velocity, its final velocity =

V_x = a_x(t_2)
where t_2 = 2 s

its initial velocity V_{ox} = 2\Delta x + a_xt_1^2 / (2t_1) where t_1 = .5s

is = to the final velocity first equation, so the two are =

2\Delta x + a_xt_1^2 / (2t_1) = a_x(t_2)

now solving

a_x (2t_1)(t_2) = 2\Delta x + a_x t_1^2
a_x(2t_1)(t_2) - a_xt_1^2 = 2\Delta x

a_x [ (2t_1)(t_2) - (t_1)^2 ] = 2\Delta x
a_x = (2\Delta x ) / (2t_1)(t_2)-(t_1^2)

= a_x = 8 m / (1s)(2s) - (.5s)^2 = 8m / (1.75 s)^2 = 4.6 m/s^2but my book is telling me my answer is aboout 4 seconds.

My answer is closer to 5 seconds.

Does anyone know what I did wrong? Maybe the way I set up my eq's?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Check ##\Delta x = V_xt - (1/2) a_xt^2## : do you really think an accelerating car would go backwards after ##2v\over a## seconds ?
 
BvU said:
Check ##\Delta x = V_xt - (1/2) a_xt^2## : do you really think an accelerating car would go backwards after ##2v\over a## seconds ?

I think I understand now. To answer your question, no lol.

Using \Delta x = V_{ox}t + (1/2)a_xt^2 would make sense because the velocity and acceleration would be consistent, right?

and my V_{ox} would be = to my first equations V_x anyways so I can set them equal, right? Sin V_{ox} is just another way of writing V_x
 
Anyways did the problem again and got 3.6, and they say the answer is ABOUT 4 which is pretty vague but I think I did it correctly now using

\Delta x = V_{ox}t + (1/2)a_xt^2

where Vox = Vx in the first equation
 
Rijad Hadzic said:
Anyways did the problem again and got 3.6, and they say the answer is ABOUT 4 which is pretty vague but I think I did it correctly now using

\Delta x = V_{ox}t + (1/2)a_xt^2

where Vox = Vx in the first equation
I get your answer if I ignore the length of the car. Never heard of Alfa Romero, but an Alfa Romeo Giulia is over 4m long. If it was in (at least partial) view for 0.5s then it traveled about 8m in that time, making the acceleration more like 7m/s2.
 
I agree. Haru points out a weakness in the problem statement. Not clear if a single point on the car is in view for 0.5 s (which I think was intended -- so car travels 4m in 0.5 s) or any part of the car (as Haru explains).
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top