Formula for calculating distance traveled with uniform acceleration

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the distance traveled by a car under uniform acceleration, given its initial speed and acceleration. Participants explore various formulas and concepts related to motion and unit analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the validity of different formulas for calculating distance, including a proposed formula and the standard equation. There are inquiries about how operators affect units of measurement, particularly in the context of acceleration and velocity.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on the formulas and unit handling, while others are exploring the implications of unit operations. Multiple interpretations of the unit analysis are being discussed, indicating a productive exchange of ideas.

Contextual Notes

There are mentions of confusion regarding unit operations and the need for clarification on how different types of numbers interact in physical equations. The discussion also reflects on the consistency required in physical laws and unit conversions.

An Indiot
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
I had to calculate the distance a car traveled in a given time given its starting speed and acceleration.

Would this formula
x=Vo.t+ (Vf-Vo)/2.t
Where Vf= a.t +Vo

Be correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sure, that works, although the standard formula is typically just given as x = x_0 + v_0 t + {{1}\over{2}}at^2 which you could solve using what you have
 
Pengwuino said:
Sure, that works, although the standard formula is typically just given as x = x_0 + v_0 t + {{1}\over{2}}at^2 which you could solve using what you have

Much appreciated.

I am having some problems figuring how opperators affect different types of numbers.

like
m/s^2 by s would be m/s and m/s^2 divided by s would be m/s^3
what should I search for explanations on how and why this works?
 
An Indiot said:
m/s^2 by s would be m/s and m/s^2 divided by s would be m/s^3

I really can't understand what are you trying to ask ...
 
An Indiot said:
Much appreciated.

I am having some problems figuring how opperators affect different types of numbers.

like
m/s^2 by s would be m/s and m/s^2 divided by s would be m/s^3
what should I search for explanations on how and why this works?

Units are handled algebraically just like variables.
 
LawrenceC said:
Units are handled algebraically just like variables.

Oh so by "by" he means multiplication ?
 
Yes, the way i think of it is as almost an equation in itself as this means you can handle the units algebraically and include any factors of magnitude (such as kilo).
 
An Indiot said:
Much appreciated.

I am having some problems figuring how opperators affect different types of numbers.

like
m/s^2 by s would be m/s and m/s^2 divided by s would be m/s^3
what should I search for explanations on how and why this works?

It works because we created it such that it did work consistently. The units represent a sense of "physicalness" to the math. If I have a distance moved, say 100m, and the amount of time it took, 5 seconds, you know the velocity must be in some unit that isn't meters and isn't seconds because you know, physically, a velocity is not a distance nor a time. It works algebraically, as another poster mentioned, because we made it work algebraically.

If for example, you created a rule such that when 2 values multiplied each other, the units would exponentiate each other, you wouldn't be able to create a consistent way of doing physics. So say you wanted a position = velocity * time, x = vt, but made the units work out like [position] = [meters/second]^{[second]}, you wouldn't be able to create a consistent system where you could move between times, energies, positions, accelerations, etc. in a consistent manner (or I really really really doubt you could). Plus, with this example in mind, you'd clearly realize somethings wrong because our physical idea of "positions" are measured as a length in meters or feet or whatever.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 84 ·
3
Replies
84
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K