Intuition about derivative of x^2 at 0

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the derivative of the function \(x^2\) with respect to time \(t\) in the context of uniform 1D motion of a particle with constant velocity \(v\). The derivative is expressed as \(\frac{d(x^2)}{dt} = 2v^2t\), which indicates that at \(t=0\), the rate of change of \(x^2\) is zero because \(x\) is also zero at that moment. This leads to confusion regarding the expectation that increasing a positive number should also increase its square, highlighting the importance of understanding the behavior of functions at specific points, particularly at local minima.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of calculus, specifically derivatives
  • Familiarity with the concept of uniform motion
  • Knowledge of the properties of quadratic functions
  • Basic grasp of infinitesimals and limits
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the concept of derivatives in calculus, focusing on polynomial functions
  • Explore the implications of evaluating derivatives at critical points
  • Learn about the physical interpretation of derivatives in motion
  • Investigate the behavior of functions around local minima and maxima
USEFUL FOR

Students studying calculus, physics enthusiasts, and anyone looking to deepen their understanding of derivatives and their applications in motion analysis.

Deter Pinklage

Homework Statement


So my problem is mainly intuitive one, in that this *feels* wrong, and am mostly looking for insight.

If we have uniform 1D motion of a particle along ##x## with constant velocity ##v##, what is the rate of change (first derivative with respect to time) of the variable ##x^2##, particularly when evaluated at ##t=0##?

Homework Equations


Well, pretty simply:
##\frac {d(x^2)}{dt} = 2v^2t##

The Attempt at a Solution


Now, I get that, but that would mean that at ##t=0##, ##x## is increasing at a rate of ##v##, whereas ##x^2## is not increasing at all. This confuses me because when you increase some positive number you must increase its square as well, right? Am I missing something obvious or something about the nature of infinitesimals?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It looks like you've assumed ##x=vt##, so when ##t=0##, you have ##x=0##, which isn't a positive number. Does that clear up your confusion?
 
Right, of course, since when ##x## goes negative, ##x^2## will still have to increase so you got to have the local minimum. Idk why when you actually think about it physically it was weird. Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K