Instantaneous velocity question?

[Saitama]

Homework Statement

The problem is that i am having a doubt in a statement given in the pdf below:-

http://ncertbooks.prashanthellina.com/class_11.Physics.PhysicsPartI/ch-3.pdf

On page number 6, a line is written "For the graph shown in Fig. 3.6, x=0.08 t³." I am not able understand how this x=0.08t³ came out?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution

 

[I like Serena]

On page number 6, a line is written "For the graph shown in Fig. 3.6, x=0.08 t³." I am not able understand how this x=0.08t³ came out?

Hi Pranav-Arora!

It is an example.
x=0.08 t³ was not derived anywhere.
It was taken as an example to illustrate the theory.

Btw, your link did not work as is.

 

[Saitama]

Hi Pranav-Arora!

It is an example.
x=0.08 t³ was not derived anywhere.
It was taken as an example to illustrate the theory.

Btw, you link did not work as is.

Thanks for your reply!
And the link works properly!

 

[I like Serena]

the link works properly!

Right! Now it does!
Did you change it?

 

[Saitama]

Right! Now it does!
Did you change it?

No, i didn't change it!

 

[arjunaphysik]

I agree that the equation does seem to appear out of nowhere, so it's probably just a given that the equation x=0.08t^3 describes the car's motion. The author probably should have pointed this out. It doesn't really follow that this is the case from any of the text that precedes it.

HTH

 

[Saitama]

After the line, "For the graph shown in Fig. 3.6, x=0.08 t3." it is written that "Table 3.1 gives the value of Δx/Δt calculated for Δt equal to 2.0 s, 1.0 s, 0.5 s, 0.1 s and 0.01 s centred at t = 4.0 s."

What does it mean by "centered at 4.0s"?

 

[I like Serena]

What does it mean by "centered at 4.0s"?

It would have been better worded if they had said "relative to t=4.0 s".

In Fig 3.6 you can see they have taken t=4.0 s as point P, relative to which the example is worked out.
In the table they're showing delta t's that are relative to t=4.0 s.

 

[Saitama]

It would have been better worded if they had said "relative to t=4.0 s".

In Fig 3.6 you can see they have taken t=4.0 s as point P, relative to which the example is worked out.
In the table they're showing delta t's that are relative to t=4.0 s.

Thanks!
I got it.

 

[I like Serena]

No more questions?

I would have expected another one by now!

 

[Saitama]

No more questions?

I would have expected another one by now!

Yes, because i left this topic for a few days to complete the MIT lectures on Calculus.