How does the chain rule apply to acceleration in the context of mechanics?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of the chain rule in calculus, specifically in the context of mechanics and acceleration. Participants explore how the relationship between velocity, time, and position can be expressed using the chain rule, particularly in the context of work and energy concepts in mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the legality of using the chain rule to express \(\frac{dv}{dt}=\frac{dv}{dx}\frac{dx}{dt}\), seeking clarification on its application in this context.
  • Another participant explains that velocity can be defined as a function of either time or position, referencing common equations of motion to illustrate this point.
  • A participant emphasizes that the chain rule applies when considering \(v\) as a function of \(x\), which is itself a function of \(t\), thus supporting the use of the chain rule in this scenario.
  • Further clarification is provided that the chain rule does not require \(v\) to be a function of two variables but can be viewed as a composite function of \(x(t)\).
  • Another participant suggests rewriting the relationship to emphasize the dependency of \(v\) on \(x\) and \(t\), which may help in understanding the application of the chain rule.
  • One participant proposes inverting the function \(x(t)\) to express \(v\) in terms of \(t\), reinforcing the idea of treating \(v\) as a function of \(x\) alone.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the application of the chain rule, with some agreeing on its validity in this context while others seek further clarification. The discussion remains exploratory without a definitive consensus on the interpretation of the chain rule's application.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the chain rule is often not introduced in this specific form in introductory calculus courses, which may contribute to confusion regarding its application in mechanics.

milesyoung
Messages
818
Reaction score
67
Hi, I'm new to these forums so not exactly sure where to place this question, although calculus seems a good bet, so here goes:

I'm currently taking a mechanics course at my university (current subject is work/energy), and I'll just post this snippit from our textbook (Physics for Scientists and Engineers with Modern Physics 7th edition, Jewett/Serway):

[snippit]

[tex] \begin{equation*}<br /> W_{net}=\int^{x_f}_{x_i}\sum F\,dx<br /> \end{equation*}[/tex]

Using Newton's second law, we substitute for the magnitude of the net force [itex]\sum F=ma[/itex] and then perform the following chain-rule manipulations on the integrand:

[tex] \begin{align*}<br /> W_{net}&=\int^{x_f}_{x_i}ma\,dx=\int^{x_f}_{x_i}m\frac{dv}{dt}\,dx=\int^{x_f}_{x_i}m\frac{dv}{dx}\frac{dx}{dt}\,dx=\int^{v_f}_{v_i}mv\,dv\\<br /> W_{net}&=\frac{1}{2}{mv_f}^2-\frac{1}{2}{mv_i}^2<br /> \end{align*}[/tex]

[/snippit]

How is:

[tex]\frac{dv}{dt}=\frac{dv}{dx}\frac{dx}{dt}[/tex]

legal in this context?

I know the Chain Rule states the following:

[tex] \begin{equation*}<br /> \frac{dy}{dx}=\frac{dy}{du}\cdot\frac{du}{dx}<br /> \end{equation*}[/tex]

But this is valid only (to my understanding) for the derivative of the composite of two functions.

If anyone could help me sort this out, I'd be much obliged.
Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

milesyoung said:
How is:

[tex]\frac{dv}{dt}=\frac{dv}{dx}\frac{dx}{dt}[/tex]

legal in this context?

I know the Chain Rule states the following:

[tex] \begin{equation*}<br /> \frac{dy}{dx}=\frac{dy}{du}\cdot\frac{du}{dx}<br /> \end{equation*}[/tex]

But this is valid only (to my understanding) for the derivative of the composite of two functions.

Hi milesyoung! Welcome to PF! :smile:

v can be defined as a function of t or of x

for example, you're probably familiar with the constant acceleration equations

v = u + at

v2 = u2 + 2ax

in the first, v is expressed as a function of t (only),

in the second, v is expressed as a function of x (only) :smile:
 
Thanks for the quick response.

Forgive me if I'm being a bit dense about this, been trying to wrap my head around it for hours and I'm probably just missing something trivial.

What I don't get is how:

[tex] \frac{dv}{dt}=\frac{dv}{dx}\frac{dx}{dt}[/tex]

is possible.

For me it would seem like you would need to be able to interpret v as a composite of two functions for the Chain Rule to have a valid use.
 
milesyoung said:
For me it would seem like you would need to be able to interpret v as a composite of two functions for the Chain Rule to have a valid use.

Nooo … the chain rule is for v a function of one variable (which itself is a function of another variable) …

here, v is a function of the variable x, and x is a function of the variable t :wink:
 
You're probably having a hard time looking at it this way because it's not usually introduced in this form in most 1st semester calculus classes, so perhaps if you were to rewrite it like this:

[tex]v(t)=v(x(t))[/tex]

[tex]v'(t)=v'(x(t))*x'(t)[/tex]

[tex]\frac{dv}{dt}=\frac{dv}{dx}\frac{dx}{dt}[/tex]

Helps?
 
@Tim: Didn't mean to imply that v needed to be interpreted as a function of two variables, just meant v as a composite function, as in [tex]v(x(t))[/tex] :smile:

Thanks for the help. I think I just needed to mull over how v could be a function of x, which in turn is a function of t.
 
You know that we have x(t) and v(t), so invert x(t) to get t(x), then plug this into v so you have v(t) = v(t(x)) where in my last expression v is a function of x alone.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K