1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Math question related to the work-energy theorem

  1. Dec 1, 2014 #1
    There’s a mathematical physics question I have that’s been bugging me lately. I’m not a mathematician so I don’t know if my logic is mathematically “legal” or sound.

    Part 1

    1. Say we restrict ourselves to one dimension and define a spatial coordinate, x. Then we square it, so now we have x^2.

    2. Now we make an equation of it, x^2 = x^2.

    3. Now I want to divide each side by 1/t^2, yielding (x^2)/(t^2) = (x/t)(x/t) = v^2, where v=velocity.

    Does that look ok so far, can I do that operation?

    4. Now I want to redo step 3 in a different manner. Instead of what I wrote above, I want to do the following: divide each side by 1/t^2, yielding (x^2)/(t^2) = (x/t^2) (x) = (a)(x), where a=acceleration and x=spatial displacement along the x coordinate.

    My question is, can I take my choice as to how I can split up the time variables on the RHS of the equation in both 3 and 4 given what’s on the left?

    5. What about the differential form of 3 and 4? Can I write the RHS version of 3 as (dx/dt)(dx/dt), and version 4 as (d^2x/dt^2)(dx)?


    Part 2

    I’m interested in the math aspect of the equation but it was the work energy theorem that got me thinking about it. Through a few mathematical tricks I can comfortably follow, the work energy theorem gives you a kinetic energy term, ½ mv^2 from the work term, or, Force times distance (m)(a)(x) = ½(m)(v^2), where m is mass, v is velocity, a is acceleration, and x is spatial displacement.

    Now, if we add a mass term to my equation 3 above in part 1, you get mv^2, and if you add that same mass term to equation 4 you get (m)(a)(x), or the work term.

    So, if it isn’t obvious already, my conundrum here is that, from my mathematical tinkering in numbers 1-4 above in part 1, I came up with an equivalence (m)(a)(x) = mv^2, but the work-energy theorem tells us that (m)(a)(x) = 1/2mv^2. Where did that extra ½ term come from?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 1, 2014 #2
    You've assumed constant speed and a non zero acceleration. In general ##\frac{x}{t} \neq v ## and similarly ##\frac{x}{t^2} \neq a ##
     
  4. Dec 1, 2014 #3

    Nugatory

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Loosely speaking (very loosely!) the factor of 1/2 appears because the speed of an object undergoing constant acceleration from rest for a time ##t## is ##v(t)=at## but its average speed over that time is ##at/2##.

    The problem with your calculation is that it's not correct to say that ##v=x/t## - if it were, the speed of an object would change according to which point you choose to be ##x=0##. You can say that the average velocity is ##\Delta{x} / \Delta{t}## but that doesn't tell you anything about the speed at any given moment.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Math question related to the work-energy theorem
  1. Work-energy theorem (Replies: 8)

Loading...