Kinetic Energy Time Derivative

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the time derivative of kinetic energy, specifically proving that if mass changes over time, then the derivative of kinetic energy, represented as d(mT)/dt, equals the dot product of force and mass (F·m). The participants clarify that the product rule must be applied correctly, as the assumption of constant mass leads to incorrect conclusions. The correct approach involves recognizing that both mass and velocity can change, necessitating a more nuanced application of the product rule.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of kinetic energy and its mathematical representation.
  • Familiarity with the product rule in calculus.
  • Knowledge of vector operations, specifically dot products.
  • Basic principles of dynamics, including force and mass relationships.
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the product rule in calculus and its application to physics problems.
  • Study the relationship between kinetic energy and momentum in varying mass scenarios.
  • Explore advanced dynamics concepts, including variable mass systems.
  • Learn about the implications of changing mass on force and acceleration in physics.
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in physics, particularly those studying mechanics, as well as anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of kinetic energy and dynamics involving variable mass systems.

cooev769
Messages
114
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



So the first part asks to prove the time derivative of kinetic energy is dT/dt=F dot product v which I did not problem. but then the second part of the problem asks to prove that if the mass is changing with time then the time derivative of d(mT)/dt=F dot product m and I'm sure this can be correct shown in my attempt at a solution below.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
If we are to assume that both kinetic energy and m and no constant with time then d(mT)/dt can be given using the product rule as = m dot T + m T dot.

m T dot will be as T dot is F dot product v = m F.v = F.p

Which is supposed to be the answer, but the first term will be non zero, given m dot is non zero, the first term goes to:

m dot 0.5 m r dot dot product r dot. This is only zero is the m dot is zero or mass or r dot is zero, but this is not a fair assumption. Hence how can his answer be correct. It seems as if he's just multipled dT/dt=F.v by m on both sides and then said well m is independent of time and hence it can go in the derivative. But his question is with m changing. Am i wrong?

Thanks

Evan
 
Physics news on Phys.org
\frac{d}{dt}(\frac{1}{2}mv^{2})=\frac{1}{2}\frac{dm}{dt}\cdot v^{2}+\frac{1}{2}m\frac{dv^{2}}{dv}\frac{dv}{dt}
 
The forum software provides you with typesetting tools. You should use them as your post as written is not easy to follow. Proofreading your post and fixing typos wouldn't hurt either.

cooev769 said:

Homework Statement



So the first part asks to prove the time derivative of kinetic energy is dT/dt=F dot product v which I did not problem. but then the second part of the problem asks to prove that if the mass is changing with time then the time derivative of d(mT)/dt=F dot product m and I'm sure this can be correct shown in my attempt at a solution below.
How can you dot F and m? The mass m is a scalar.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
If we are to assume that both kinetic energy and m and no constant with time then d(mT)/dt can be given using the product rule as = m dot T + m T dot.

m T dot will be as T dot is F dot product v = m F.v = F.p
You derived the expression for ##\dot{T}## under the assumption the mass was constant, so you can't use it here.

Which is supposed to be the answer, but the first term will be non zero, given m dot is non zero, the first term goes to:

m dot 0.5 m r dot dot product r dot. This is only zero is the m dot is zero or mass or r dot is zero, but this is not a fair assumption. Hence how can his answer be correct. It seems as if he's just multipled dT/dt=F.v by m on both sides and then said well m is independent of time and hence it can go in the derivative. But his question is with m changing. Am i wrong?
Another approach you could take is to start by expressing the kinetic energy in terms of momentum instead of velocity.
 
True let me have another go :)
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K