Integrating Kinematics: Solving for Velocity with Calculus

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter PhysicsPrac
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculus Physics
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on integrating kinematics to solve for velocity using calculus. The user derives the equation for velocity, v = sqrt(2gh), from the relationship between potential energy (mgh) and kinetic energy (1/2mv^2). They substitute v with dx/dt, leading to the equation dx = sqrt(2gh) * dt and subsequently integrate to find x = t*sqrt(2gh). The user encounters a discrepancy when comparing this result with the kinematic equation x = x0 + v0t + 1/2at^2, realizing that h should represent the distance fallen, not a constant.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic physics concepts: potential energy and kinetic energy
  • Familiarity with calculus, specifically integration and differentiation
  • Knowledge of kinematic equations in classical mechanics
  • Ability to manipulate algebraic equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the derivation of kinematic equations in classical mechanics
  • Study the relationship between potential and kinetic energy in physics
  • Learn about the implications of integrating velocity with respect to time
  • Explore the concept of acceleration and its role in kinematic equations
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching mechanics, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of motion and energy transformations.

PhysicsPrac
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Ok here is my question:

Potential energy = mgh
Kinetic energy = 1/2mv^2
mgh = 1/2mv^2, solving for v you get v = sqrt(2gh)

Now I know v is the same as dx/dt so if I substite in dx/dt for v :

dx/dt = sqrt(2gh)

Multiply by dt:
dx = sqrt(2gh) * dt
Integrate:
x = t*sqrt(2gh)

This should be right, but for some reason it doesn't work when I check it with the well known x = x0 + v0t + 1/2at^2 formula, what am I doing wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm assuming that h is supposed to be the distance fallen? That would in fact be the same as your variable x then, not a constant
 
ooh I see thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
955
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K