Is Deceleration Really a Forbidden Word in Physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tim_lou
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Deceleration
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of deceleration in physics, with participants agreeing that it is a misleading term. Deceleration is viewed as a vector quantity that implies negative acceleration, which can create confusion, especially when switching frames of reference. The consensus is that deceleration should be understood as a decrease in speed rather than a distinct entity. Ultimately, while deceleration may not exist as a scientific term, its common usage remains relevant for understanding motion.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector quantities in physics
  • Familiarity with acceleration and its implications
  • Knowledge of frame of reference in motion
  • Basic principles of kinetic energy
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the mathematical representation of vector quantities in physics
  • Explore the relationship between acceleration and deceleration in various frames of reference
  • Study kinetic energy and its conservation during motion
  • Investigate common misconceptions in physics terminology
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators explaining motion concepts, and anyone interested in clarifying the terminology used in discussions about acceleration and deceleration.

tim_lou
Messages
682
Reaction score
1
as my high school physics teacher stressed, deceleration does not exist. it was a forbidden word in my introductory physics class.

I do indeed partly agree with my teacher. Since if deceleration is a vector quantity, it would be very confusing since deceleration sort of implies the "negative" of acceleration. In that case, deceleration can simply be replaced by an acceleration vector in the opposite direction.

perhaps it would make more sense to define deceleration as the decrease of the speed. just like how molecule decelerate when their temperature decrease. However, it is still confusing when one switch frame of reference, where the decrease in speed in one frame can be an increase in speed in another.

well... the discussion of deceleration is indeed quite silly... but what are your thoughts?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Imagine yourself sitting in a car with your eyes closed. Can you tell the difference between moving forward with increasing speed ("accelerating"), and moving backward with decreasing speed ("decelerating")?
 
If you have a frame of reference for speed / kinetic energy, then I would define acceleration as the one that increases velocity / kinetic energy, and deceleration as the one that decreases speed / kinetic energy.
 
I guess technically deceleration does not exist as an entity in itself, but it is just a descriptive word. As was stated, deceleration is just acceleration in the opposite direction. What happens when you finally reach a velocity of 0 and start accelerating in the opposite direction of where you were originally going? Your acceleration/deceleration has not changed; surely you are not decelerating anymore, but you have been accelerating in the same direction the entire time.

However, I believe most people understand the concept of deceleration so it is silly to forbid its use:smile: . It's like forbidding the use of the word cold: There is no such thing as scientific cold; it is just a lack of heat, but everyone knows what cold describes.
--
Need homework help?
http://www.wholikeshomework.com"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Deceleration is a relative term, that's all.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
7K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
697
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
10K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
6K