How Does Mass and Time Affect Net Force on an Object Moving Along the X-axis?

Thread starter thesavior
Start date Oct 5, 2007
Tags

Function Position Time

AI Thread Summary

An object moving along the x-axis has its position described by the equation x(t)=At-Bt^3. The net force acting on the object can be calculated using the second derivative of its position with respect to time, resulting in the expression -6Btm. The discussion emphasizes the relationship between mass, time, and net force, highlighting the importance of understanding how these variables interact. The Newtonian formula for force is central to this calculation, linking motion to the forces acting on the object. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for analyzing the object's behavior over time.

Oct 5, 2007

thesavior

An object with mass m moves along the x-axis. Its position as a function of time is given by x(t)=At-Bt^3, where A and B are constants. Calculate the net force on the object as a function of time.

ans: -6Btm

Physics news on Phys.org

Oct 5, 2007

Loren Booda

What is the Newtonian formula for force which includes a derivative of position with respect to time?

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...

View full post »

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...

View full post »