Undergrad How can engineers get away with splitting differentials in dynamics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Trying2Learn
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the mathematical validity of manipulating differentials in introductory dynamics, particularly the progression from velocity and acceleration to the equation vdv = ads. While this approach works for certain one-dimensional problems, it raises concerns about the rigor of splitting differentials, which can lead to oversights, especially when transitioning between vector and scalar forms. Participants note that engineers often use this method despite its mathematical shortcomings, suggesting that familiarity with these manipulations allows for practical applications, albeit with risks. Caution is advised, as improper handling of differentials can lead to errors in more complex scenarios. Ultimately, the conversation highlights the balance between practical engineering applications and the need for mathematical precision.
Trying2Learn
Messages
375
Reaction score
57
TL;DR
splitting the differential
In an introductory dynamics textbook, we often see this progression

v = ds/dt ---> dt = ds/v

a = dv/dt ---> dt = dv/a

Equating the dt, we get: vdv=ads

Now my question

On the one hand, this works for certain problems.
On the other hand, this is splitting the differential.

Could someone please explain

Why it works under certain conditions? How engineers get away with this?

If it is poor math to do this: why? Is it because one should never split the differential?

How can engineers get away with this?

I see that it does work, but only in ONE dimension.

This whole issue has always bothered me but I cannot state, with clarity, conviction, precision:
Why it is poor math to do this
Why we can get away with it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Physicists are usually pretty casual in dealing with differentials :smile: .
In the 'progression' you quote, the expressions at the left are vector equations; the ones on the right are scalar expressions.
Beginning physicists should be careful not to accidentally hop back and forth, or they risk overlooking a Jacobian and other useful mathematical goodies.

##\ ##
 
  • Like
Likes fresh_42, topsquark and vanhees71
Trying2Learn said:
TL;DR Summary: splitting the differential

In an introductory dynamics textbook, we often see this progression

v = ds/dt ---> dt = ds/v

a = dv/dt ---> dt = dv/a

Equating the dt, we get: vdv=ads

Now my question

On the one hand, this works for certain problems.
On the other hand, this is splitting the differential.

Could someone please explain

Why it works under certain conditions? How engineers get away with this?

If it is poor math to do this: why? Is it because one should never split the differential?

How can engineers get away with this?

I see that it does work, but only in ONE dimension.

This whole issue has always bothered me but I cannot state, with clarity, conviction, precision:
Why it is poor math to do this
Why we can get away with it.
A formal proof of why this jugglery with "d"'s actually works is a nightmare because they are not even defined as solids at this level.
$$
\dfrac{ds}{dt}=\lim_{h \to 0}\dfrac{s(t+h)-s(t)}{h}
$$
Now, how would you isolate ##dt## here? I like to avoid such steps by using Weierstraß's formula: $$ s(t+h)= s(t)+ s'(t) \cdot h + o(h)$$ with a remainder ##o(h)## that is quadratic in ##h## so it vanishes fast as ##h## goes to zero. With that formula, Weierstraß has out all the limit stuff in the ##o(h)## term and we can work with them as there was no limit stuff.

You should be careful with
BvU said:
Physicists are usually pretty casual in dealing with differentials :smile: .
because: they have practiced juggling! It can go wrong!
 
fresh_42 said:
It can go wrong!
Tell me something I don't know :smile:

Been there, done that.

##\ ##
 
  • Haha
Likes malawi_glenn and fresh_42
Thread 'What is the pressure of trapped air inside this tube?'
As you can see from the picture, i have an uneven U-shaped tube, sealed at the short end. I fill the tube with water and i seal it. So the short side is filled with water and the long side ends up containg water and trapped air. Now the tube is sealed on both sides and i turn it in such a way that the traped air moves at the short side. Are my claims about pressure in senarios A & B correct? What is the pressure for all points in senario C? (My question is basically coming from watching...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K