Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Integration of newton equation?

  1. Mar 15, 2006 #1
    integration of newton equation???????

    Newton's second law is insufficient to describe the motion of a particle. In addition, it requires a value for F, obtained by considering the particular physical entities with which the particle is interacting. For example, a typical resistive force may be modelled as a function of the velocity of the particle, for example:

    [tex] \mathbf{F}_{\rm R} = - \lambda \mathbf{v}[/tex]

    with λ a positive constant. Once independent relations for each force acting on a particle are available, they can be substituted into Newton's second law to obtain an ordinary differential equation, which is called the equation of motion. Continuing the example, assume that friction is the only force acting on the particle. Then the equation of motion is

    [tex] - \lambda \mathbf{v} = m \mathbf{a} = m {d\mathbf{v} \over dt}.[/tex]

    This can be integrated to obtain

    [tex] \mathbf{v} = \mathbf{v}_0 e^{- \lambda t / m} [/tex]
    can some body show me step by step the intergration there?

    (Edited by HallsofIvy to correct LaTex.)
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 16, 2006
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 16, 2006 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    [tex]-\lambda \mathbf{v}= m \frac{d\mathbf{v}}{dt}[/tex]
    is what's called a "separable differential equation". We can "separate" the variables as
    [tex]-\frac{\lambda}{m} dt= \frac{dv}{v}[/tex]

    Integrating both sides:

    [tex]-\frac{\lamba}{m}t= ln v+ C[/tex]
    [tex]ln v= -\frac{\lambda}{m}t- C[/tex]

    [tex]v= C' e^{-\frac{\lambda}{m}t}[/tex]
    (C'= e-C)

    At t= 0 we have
    [tex]v(0)= v_0= C' e^0= C'[/tex]
    [tex]v(t)= v_0e^{-\frac{\lambda}{m}t}[/tex]
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 16, 2006
  4. Mar 16, 2006 #3


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    JUst a minor addition to Halls' general procedure:
    It is unproblematic to generalize this if the velocity is a vector, rather than a scalar:
    Method 1:
    Do component-wise integration. This will always work.

    Method 2:
    For this particular problem, we have straightline motion, since the acceleration vector is parallell to the velocity vector.
    Thus, we can always let one coordinate axis coincide with the direction of the velocity vector, i.e, transform our vector equation into a suitable scalar equation.
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2006
  5. Mar 16, 2006 #4
    i dont' get it
    can you show how you get this?:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
    please show me how you get it??????????????:grumpy:
  6. Mar 16, 2006 #5
    never mind i get it
    thank for your replies!
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook