Force: Mass m Velocity Change from v1 to v2

AI Thread Summary
A block of mass m on a frictionless surface experiences a change in velocity from v1 (zero) to v2 due to an applied push, which is identified as force. The discussion critiques the definition of force as m*(v2-v1), noting that this interpretation equates different time intervals for the same velocity change, which deviates from Newtonian mechanics. In standard physics, force is defined as the rate of change of momentum, not the total change over time. The term "impulse" is used to describe the product of mass and change in velocity over a time period. The conversation emphasizes the importance of adhering to established definitions in physics.
chandran
Messages
137
Reaction score
1
A block of mass m is resting on a frictionless surface and a push is given to it along the surface.

Now because of the push the velocity of the mass changes from v1 to v2. ofcourse v1 is zero. So this is what that push has done to the mass m. This push is called force. so force gives a result in which the mass m changes its velocity from v1 to v2.

I am defining force=m*(v2-v1).

Any thoughts on this further
 
Physics news on Phys.org
so according to your definition, a push that makes the velocity of the mass go from v1 to v2 in 1 second is the same force as a push that makes the velocity of the mass go from v1 to v2 in 4 hours. this is not the way force is defined in Newtonian machanics.

However you may, if you please, define 'force' the way you did, and develop chandranian mechanics from there. Have fun :smile:
 
chandran, I'm not sure what your point is. As quasar987 pointed out, you are free to "define" terms any way you want, but this is not the standard definition of "force". In fact, m(v2-v1), "mass times the change in velocity" is normally called "impulse"- the change in the momentum over a certain time. Force is normally defined as the "rate[\b] of change" of momentum at a given instant, not the total change of a time period.
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
131
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
54
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
59
Views
3K
Back
Top