Introductory Level Calculus Question

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves an object moving in a straight line with a given acceleration function, a(t) = 2 – 6t. The original poster seeks to determine the distance from the starting point P after 3 seconds, given initial conditions of velocity and position.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the necessity of calculus for solving the problem, noting the relationship between acceleration, velocity, and displacement. There are attempts to integrate the acceleration function to find velocity and subsequently displacement.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the integration process and the implications of initial conditions on the constants involved in the equations. There is an ongoing exploration of the correct interpretation of the results, particularly regarding the displacement at t=3.

Contextual Notes

Participants question whether the problem is appropriate for an introductory level, given its reliance on calculus concepts. There is also mention of the educational context in which basic calculus techniques are introduced prior to formal calculus courses.

Wormaldson
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
I know this is the Precalculus Mathematics forum, but this is the kind of intro-level stuff that is taught in general high school mathematics classes before high school calculus, so I thought it would be better off here.

Homework Statement



An object is moving in a straight line.
P is a point on the line.
Its acceleration, a ms–2 at a time t seconds after it leaves P, is given by
a(t) = 2 – 6t
When t = 0, the object is at point P and has a velocity of 4 ms–1.
How far is the object from P when t = 3?

Homework Equations



a(t) = 2 – 6t

The Attempt at a Solution



Honestly, I'm not really too sure to begin with this one. It's obvious enough that P is at the y-intercept, +2, and that the gradient of a(t) = 2 – 6t is 6, but I don't know where to go from here. :confused:

Any help would be much appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Is it really taught as intro before calculus? Because this problem needs calculus to be solved.

The derivative of displacement is velocity and the derivative of velocity is acceleration, so going backwards, you would have to take the integral of the acceleration to get velocity and so on.
 
Mentallic said:
Is it really taught as intro before calculus? Because this problem needs calculus to be solved.

The derivative of displacement is velocity and the derivative of velocity is acceleration, so going backwards, you would have to take the integral of the acceleration to get velocity and so on.

What I meant was, we get taught basic stuff like power rule and constant rule differentiation, some basic stuff about integration, and have a paper in our end of year exam that requires us to apply those techniques to solve problems.

Thanks for the help.
 
Last edited:
Oh I see, they just give you a little taste of calculus so as not to scare you off :wink:
 
Alright, so I've got that the integral of a(t) = 2 – 6t is 2t - 3t2 by reversing the power rule.

So I guess the velocity beyond point P is given by 2t - 3t2 + 4 (since the velocity at P is already 4). Now I can't think of what to do next...
 
You need to integrate the velocity function to get the position function, which will allow you to calculate x(3).
 
It asks you how far the object is from P at t=3. In other words, what is the displacement at t=3?
 
Okay, so integrating 2t - 3t2 + 4 gave me t2 - t3 + 4t, which equals -6 when t = 3. I'm not entirely sure that's my final answer though; I'm not sure that I did the right thing with the +4 velocity the object has at point P.
 
When you take the derivative of some function, any constant you have is wiped clean.

For y=x2, dy/dx=2x
y=x2-2, dy/dx=2x
y=x2+c, dy/dx=2x

The derivative is always the same, so when we integrate 2x we end up with x2+c, and we don't know this constant.

When we integrated the acceleration formula, we ended up with v=2t-3t2+c
and we were given information that at t=0, we had v=4 so substituting this into the equation we end up finding c=4, so then our velocity equation is v=2t-3t2+4

integrating again, we have s=t2-t3+4t+k (I just denoted the constant something else to avoid mixing it up with the constant c before)
Now if we look carefully, we will notice that we were given the information that at t=0 we start at s=0, so substituting this in we get c=0, thus our displacement formula is s=t2-t3+4t

So yes, you end up with s=-6 at t=3, which means after 3 seconds the particle would have turned around and ended up 6 units on the other end of the starting point. This can be observed intuitively by noticing that the acceleration formula a(t) = 2 – 6t, becomes negative for t>2/3 and quickly grows quite large negatively.
 
  • #10
Mentallic said:
When you take the derivative of some function, any constant you have is wiped clean.

For y=x2, dy/dx=2x
y=x2-2, dy/dx=2x
y=x2+c, dy/dx=2x

The derivative is always the same, so when we integrate 2x we end up with x2+c, and we don't know this constant.

When we integrated the acceleration formula, we ended up with v=2t-3t2+c
and we were given information that at t=0, we had v=4 so substituting this into the equation we end up finding c=4, so then our velocity equation is v=2t-3t2+4

integrating again, we have s=t2-t3+4t+k (I just denoted the constant something else to avoid mixing it up with the constant c before)
Now if we look carefully, we will notice that we were given the information that at t=0 we start at s=0, so substituting this in we get c=0, thus our displacement formula is s=t2-t3+4t

So yes, you end up with s=-6 at t=3, which means after 3 seconds the particle would have turned around and ended up 6 units on the other end of the starting point. This can be observed intuitively by noticing that the acceleration formula a(t) = 2 – 6t, becomes negative for t>2/3 and quickly grows quite large negatively.

Thank you very much for taking the time to explain how to do this question to me, especially for the long explanation in the quoted post. I understand the mathematics behind this question a lot better now, which will definitely help me for my upcoming exams.
 
  • #11
You're welcome :smile: good luck in your exams!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
Replies
16
Views
7K