How to Integrate to find velocity as a function of time

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around integrating a differential equation of the form dv/dt = -βv to find the velocity as a function of time, given an initial velocity v0. The participants explore the implications of separating variables and the correct application of integration techniques in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Some participants attempt to integrate directly without separating variables, leading to questions about the validity of their results. Others explore the separation of variables method, questioning the correctness of their derived expressions for velocity.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively discussing various approaches to the problem, with some providing alternative methods and others questioning the assumptions made in the original attempts. There is a recognition of the need for clarity in the integration process and the importance of correctly applying mathematical rules.

Contextual Notes

There are ongoing discussions about the limitations of certain integration techniques and the implications of treating velocity as a function of time. Participants note the necessity of changing limits during integration and the challenges posed by unknown variables in the equations.

Sho Kano
Messages
372
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


dv/dt = -βv
Integrate to find velocity as a function of time, assume the particle's initial velocity is v0.
β is constant
v = velocity (not constant)
t = time

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


dv = -βvdt
∫dv = -β∫vdt --------> limits of integration for the right side are from 0 to t
v(t) = -βt + v0
I know I'm probably supposed to separate the variables so that v is with dv and β is with t, but this way seems to work too. Both ways seems correct, but there can only be one right answer... which one is it? Why does my attempt work out mathematically but is still wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Using the supposedly correct separation of variables I get:
v(t) = e ^ (ln(v0) - βt)
Is this okay?
 
Sho Kano said:
Using the supposedly correct separation of variables I get:
v(t) = e ^ (ln(v0) - βt)
Is this okay?
Why don't you show your work to obtain this solution.
 
SteamKing said:
Why don't you show your work to obtain this solution.
dv/dt = -βv

dv/v = -βdt
∫dv/v = -β∫dt-----> left integral from v0 to v, right integral from 0 to t
ln(v) from v0 to v = -βt
ln(v) - ln(v0) = -βt
ln(v) = ln(v0) - βt
v(t) = e ^ (ln(v0) - βt)----------> "e" both sides
 
The better way to do it is to use the ln(A)-ln(B)=ln(A/B) rule, so in the step where you have ln(v)-ln(v0), make it ln(v/v0). Then you can raise both sides to e and then get the following:

e^(ln(v/v0))= e^(-βt)

v/v0 = e^-βt

v(t)=(v0) e^-βt

This is a much easier form to have it in, and it really helps to visually model the relationship between v and time. I hope this helps=)
 
Quantum2323 said:
The better way to do it is to use the ln(A)-ln(B)=ln(A/B) rule, so in the step where you have ln(v)-ln(v0), make it ln(v/v0). Then you can raise both sides to e and then get the following:

e^(ln(v/v0))= e^(-βt)

v/v0 = e^-βt

v(t)=(v0) e^-βt

This is a much easier form to have it in, and it really helps to visually model the relationship between v and time. I hope this helps=)
Thanks, it looks a lot like one of those exponential growth/decay relationships - which says a lot about how the object behaves. Do you have any thoughts on my original attempt at the solution though? The math works out, but it ends up being the wrong answer. Here's what I did:
dv = -βvdt
∫dv = -β∫vdt --------> limits of integration for the right side are from 0 to t
v(t) = -βt + v0
 
Sho Kano said:
Thanks, it looks a lot like one of those exponential growth/decay relationships - which says a lot about how the object behaves. Do you have any thoughts on my original attempt at the solution though? The math works out, but it ends up being the wrong answer. Here's what I did:
dv = -βvdt
∫dv = -β∫vdt --------> limits of integration for the right side are from 0 to t
v(t) = -βt + v0

In any differential equation, you have to separate the variables, and putting v on the side of dt instead of with the dv shouldn't come up with the right answer. Besides, if you do the integration out, it would actually be:
-β∫vdt from 0 to t---> -β(vt). Adding the right side, you get--> -βvt + v0.
So that method would not get you the answer of -βt + v0 anyways. Is -βt + v0 the right answer? I hope this helps=)
 
Sho Kano said:
Do you have any thoughts on my original attempt at the solution though? The math works out, but it ends up being the wrong answer. Here's what I did:
dv = -βvdt
∫dv = -β∫vdt

The reason you can't do the problem this way is that since ##v(t)## is unknown, you can't calculate ##\int v(t)~dt##
 
Quantum2323 said:
Besides, if you do the integration out, it would actually be:
-β∫vdt from 0 to t---> -β(vt). Adding the right side, you get--> -βvt + v0.
This isn't correct either. As the OP noted, you shouldn't get inconsistent answers, and your result clearly isn't the same as the exponential solution.
 
  • #10
Sho Kano said:

Homework Statement


dv/dt = -βv
Integrate to find velocity as a function of time, assume the particle's initial velocity is v0.
β is constant
v = velocity (not constant)
t = time

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


dv = -βvdt
∫dv = -β∫vdt --------> limits of integration for the right side are from 0 to t
v(t) = -βt + v0
I know I'm probably supposed to separate the variables so that v is with dv and β is with t, but this way seems to work too. Both ways seems correct, but there can only be one right answer... which one is it? Why does my attempt work out mathematically but is still wrong?

Your attempt replaces a differential equation by an integral equation; it still does not solve the problem. Written out properly (with all integration limits included), your method yields
v(t) - v_0 = - \beta \int_0^t v(\tau) \, d\tau
You cannot easily figure out ##\{v(t)\}## from this!
 
  • #11
I'm thinking v(t) as a velocity function, and you're integrating that over dt, so

∫dv = -β∫vdt right side from 0 ---> t
v - v0 = -β∫(dx/dt)dt right side from 0 ---> t
v - v0 = -β∫dx right side from 0 ---> t
v(t) = -βt + v0 ?
 
  • #12
Sho Kano said:
I'm thinking v(t) as a velocity function, and you're integrating that over dt, so

∫dv = -β∫vdt right side from 0 ---> t
v - v0 = -β∫(dx/dt)dt right side from 0 ---> t
v - v0 = -β∫dx right side from 0 ---> t

If you integrate by substitution, you have to change the limits. Setting v = dx/dt means that <br /> \int_0^t v\,dt = \int_{x(0)}^{x(t)} \,dx. You end up with <br /> v(t) - v_0 = - \beta(x(t) - x(0)) which of course doesn't help because you don't know what x(t) is.
 
  • #13
pasmith said:
If you integrate by substitution, you have to change the limits. Setting v = dx/dt means that <br /> \int_0^t v\,dt = \int_{x(0)}^{x(t)} \,dx. You end up with <br /> v(t) - v_0 = - \beta(x(t) - x(0)) which of course doesn't help because you don't know what x(t) is.
Oh I see, integrating the velocity function over time gives us the position function - which in this case doesn't matter.

On a separate note,
v(t)−v0=−β(x(t)−x(0))
is also equal
Δv = -βΔx
right?
 
  • #14
Quantum2323 said:
Sho Kano said:
...

ln(v) - ln(v0) = -βt
ln(v) = ln(v0) - βt
v(t) = e ^ (ln(v0) - βt)----------> "e" both sides
The better way to do it is to use the ln(A)-ln(B)=ln(A/B) rule, so in the step where you have ln(v)-ln(v0), make it ln(v/v0). Then you can raise both sides to e and then get the following:

e^(ln(v/v0))= e^(-βt)

v/v0 = e^-βt

v(t)=(v0) e^-βt

This is a much easier form to have it in, and it really helps to visually model the relationship between v and time. I hope this helps=)

Yes, OP can use ln(v) - ln(v0) = ln(v/v0) as you suggested.

However, it's possible to simply take OP's result and use rules of exponents.

##\ v(t) = e^{\,\ln(v_0) - \beta t}\ ##
##=e^{\,\ln(v_0)}\cdot e^{-\beta t}\ ##
##=v_0\cdot e^{-\beta t}\ ##​
.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K