Finding Instantaneous Velocity: Taking the Derivative?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the methods for finding instantaneous velocity, particularly focusing on the use of derivatives versus other techniques like simplification and factoring. Participants explore the relevance of different approaches in calculus, especially in the context of physics and engineering applications.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that taking the derivative is the simplest method for finding instantaneous velocity, questioning the need for other techniques like simplification or factoring.
  • Others argue that while derivatives are useful, understanding the foundational concepts and alternative methods is important for a comprehensive grasp of calculus.
  • A participant expresses a preference for using basic derivative rules to avoid complicating their studies, emphasizing a practical approach to learning calculus for physics and engineering.
  • One participant mentions that after initially applying the general definition of the derivative, there may be little need to repeat the process, suggesting a focus on efficiency in learning.
  • Another participant highlights the utility of software tools like Maple for solving calculus problems, implying that reliance on technology can reduce the necessity for manual calculations once foundational knowledge is established.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that taking derivatives is a straightforward method for finding instantaneous velocity, but there is disagreement on the necessity and value of learning alternative methods. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the balance between understanding foundational techniques and relying on derivative rules or computational tools.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express frustration with the time spent learning various calculus techniques, indicating a potential limitation in their appreciation for the broader applications of these methods. The discussion reflects differing opinions on the importance of foundational understanding versus practical application in engineering and physics contexts.

Femme_physics
Gold Member
Messages
2,548
Reaction score
1
Taking the derivative seems to be the easiest way of dealing with solving for instantaneous velocity. Should I ever bother with taking the reciprocal, simplifying, or factoring the expression in order to find the 0/0 culprit and cancel it out, or should I just take the derivative each and every time?

If so, why do we even bother learn these other long methods of finding the derivative where we can just use the derivative relatively simple rules to find it, and then we can find easily find the limit as x goes to 0, thereby finding our instantaneous velocity.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Femme_physics said:
Taking the derivative seems to be the easiest way of dealing with solving for instantaneous velocity. Should I ever bother with taking the reciprocal, simplifying, or factoring the expression in order to find the 0/0 culprit and cancel it out, or should I just take the derivative each and every time?

If so, why do we even bother learn these other long methods of finding the derivative where we can just use the derivative relatively simple rules to find it, and then we can find easily find the limit as x goes to 0, thereby finding our instantaneous velocity.

Calculus is a generic tool and finding instantaneous velocity from a displacement graph is just one application of the differential calculus.

One thing that you should notice is that with limits is that the limit term (usually h) approaches zero but is never zero. 0/0 is not defined at all but some small number e/e is always 1 even when e approaches zero (but it can never ever take on the value 0).

I agree with your frustration about spending months (maybe years in some cases) of learning the "bag of tricks" that is tricks and transforms to solve calculus problems: personally I find it kinda pointless sometimes trying to find some obscure trick to solve some stupid DE, but the truth is that math heavy scientists often need to do this.

I guess an analogy is like learning arithmetic instead of being introduced a calculator. We don't often go as far as some people go (like some chinese kids that have to do intense training with abacus systems), but I would worry if any kid didn't do some kind of thorough introduction to arithmetic the "old-fashioned" way that kids in primary school have to do.

Just remember with your limit, you can only cancel out your h^n/h terms since they will always end up in unity. If you want to know the reason, one reason is due to l'hospital's rule for limits.

Also remember what the concept of differentiation is: if you realize that, then any other application of calculus should help you realize why you have to use the "rules" that you are taught.
 
Thanks for the comprehensive reply. I think I rather just take the derivative by using the power/prouct/chain/quotient rules forever. I'm not a mathmatician, I'd like to understand the stuff I need and no more so I could get on with physics and my mechatronics course, but if I spend too much time simplifying complicated terms where I can just use those 4 basic derivative rules I might needlessly overcomplicate my studies. Just my philosophy. Again, thanks for the reply.

I'd like to add that my current position can change, but if the analogy is genuinely equivalent to that of a calculator usage for arithmetic, then I'll stick to the easier method.
 
Femme_physics said:
Taking the derivative seems to be the easiest way of dealing with solving for instantaneous velocity. Should I ever bother with taking the reciprocal, simplifying, or factoring the expression in order to find the 0/0 culprit and cancel it out, or should I just take the derivative each and every time?

Your first method sounds like setting up [itex]\Delta x / \Delta t[/itex] explicitly, and taking the limit as [itex]\Delta t \rightarrow 0[/itex]. The only reason you're doing that is as an example of applying the general definition of the derivative, so you can verify that the "cookbook rules" for powers, products, etc. actually work as advertised. After you've done it once or twice, there's no reason to do it again.
 
I see. Thanks a bunch jtbell :)
 
After you've done it once or twice, there's no reason to do it again.

Are you saying that I've been wasting my time all these years!?
 
Ya you really have been... Maple can even do series solutions so why bother once you get your degree. Even in 3rd year my profs accept my math proofs from MATLAB and maple runtimes. But that may not apply outside of Eng... I don't know. Thats not to say it isn't necessary to understand what and how maple does it
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
4K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K