Morin 3.7 -- Block sliding sideways on an inclined plane

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem from Morin 3.7 concerning a block sliding sideways on an inclined plane. The original poster describes their approach to solving the problem, which involves breaking down the friction force into components and deriving differential equations for the velocities in the x and y directions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the original poster's method of deriving equations for the velocities and the implications of substituting limits. There are questions about the validity of the algebraic steps taken, particularly regarding the introduction of extra solutions when squaring equations. Some participants suggest re-evaluating the assumptions made in the setup.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants actively questioning the steps taken and the physical soundness of the original poster's solution. There is a focus on clarifying the algebraic manipulations and ensuring that the reasoning aligns with physical principles. No consensus has been reached yet, as differing interpretations of the equations are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the original poster's approach may lead to spurious solutions when limits are applied, and there is a discussion about the implications of setting certain variables to zero. The nature of the problem and the assumptions involved in the setup are under scrutiny.

masteralien
Messages
36
Reaction score
2
Thread moved from the technical forums to the schoolwork forums
TL;DR Summary: In Morin 3.7 sliding sideways on a plane I used a completely different method than he did and got the correct answer is my method right

The problem statement is as follows
I split up the friction force into x and y components derived a diff eq for v_y in terms of v_x then took the limit as v_x goes to 0

IMG_3052.jpeg

My solution was this

$$m\ddot{x} = -\mu mg\cos(\theta) \cos(\varphi)$$
$$\\m\ddot{y}= -mg\sin(\theta)-\mu mg\cos(\theta)\sin(\varphi)$$
$$\\\mu = \tan(\theta)$$
$$\\v_x=\dot{x}$$
$$\\v_y=\dot{y}$$
where $$\varphi$$ is the angle the velocity vector makes
$$\\\dot{v}_x=-g\sin(\theta) \frac{v_x}{\sqrt{v_x^2 + v_y^2}}$$
$$\\\dot{v}_y=-g\sin(\theta)-g\sin(\theta) \frac{v_y}{\sqrt{v_x^2 + v_y^2}}$$

At long times v_x’ will be 0 so we can set final v_x = 0 as setting v_x’=0 means v_x will be 0

I then divided to get

$$\frac{dv_y}{dv_x}=\frac{v_y}{v_x} + \sqrt{1+\left(\frac{v_y}{v_x}\right)^2}$$

I substituted v_y/v_x = u and with some algebra setting the lower bound of v_x as V and upper as v_x to take the limit later and for v_y I took the upper bound as v_y and lower as 0 get


$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$

$$\frac{v_x^4}{V^2}-\frac{2v_y v_x^2}{V}+v_y^2=v_x^2+v_y^2$$

Then get
$$\frac{v_x^2}{V^2}-\frac{2v_y}{V}=1$$

Finally taking v_x goes to 0

$$v_y = -\frac{V}{2}$$

With the final speed being
$$V_f=\frac{V}{2}$$
I want to know if this solution is correct as this gives the correct answer

This is the book’s solution

IMG_3054.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
masteralien said:
I substituted v_y/v_x = u and with some algebra setting the lower bound of v_x as V and upper as v_x to take the limit later and for v_y I took the upper bound as v_y and lower as 0 get

$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$
Unfortunately, that does not give the right answer if you plug in ##v_x=0##.
Please post the omitted algebra.
 
Last edited:
Its right below the algebra
 
haruspex said:
Unfortunately, that does not give the right answer if you plug in ##v_x=0##.
Please post the omitted algebra.
The steps are right below. I even checked with a graphing calculator that as v_x approaches 0 v_y approaches -V/2
 
masteralien said:
The steps are right below.
You wrote
masteralien said:
and with some algebra
Can you post that?
masteralien said:
I even checked with a graphing calculator that as v_x approaches 0 v_y approaches -V/2
But if you substitute ##v_x=0## in the equation I quoted you get ##v_y=0##, no?
 
haruspex said:
You wrote

Can you post that?

But if you substitute ##v_x=0## in the equation I quoted you get ##v_y=0##, no?
No my steps are right below I subtracted v_y and squared both sides then divided by v_x^2 then took the limit. You need to take the limit as it approaches as this for long times its a bit like terminal velocity.
 
masteralien said:
No my steps are right below
I am asking you to show how you got from
masteralien said:
$$\frac{dv_y}{dv_x}=\frac{v_y}{v_x} + \sqrt{1+\left(\frac{v_y}{v_x}\right)^2}$$
to
masteralien said:
$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$
I do not see that anywhere.

masteralien said:
I subtracted v_y and squared both sides
Squaring introduces extra solutions. Specifically here, you are now solving
$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=\pm\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$
If we substitute ##v_x=0## in the extra solution that introduces:
$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=-\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$
we get 0=0, so this spurious solution is the one that, through taking the limit, arrives at ##v_y=V/2##.

$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$ cannot be right because ##v_x=0## implies ##v_y=0##, whether by taking limits or simply plugging in. It seems likely that it should have been $$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=-\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$.
You can avoid introducing extra solutions by dividing that through by ##v_y##, applying the binomial expansion and taking limits.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Gavran
Also v_x would never truly reach 0 just get very close and its best to express the solution a bit differently. Also I have plugged in my equation the first into desmos to check and as you decrease v_x it goes to -V/2 but never set v_x=0
$$v_y=v_x\sinh(\ln(\frac{v_x}{V}))$$
Taking x to 0
=$$V x\sinh(\ln(x))$$
=$$V x/2 (x-1/x)= V /2 (x^2-1)$$
=$$-V/2$$ as x goes to 0
 
haruspex said:
I am asking you to show how you got from

to

I do not see that anywhere.


Squaring introduces extra solutions. Specifically here, you are now solving
$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=\pm\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$
If we substitute ##v_x=0## in the extra solution that introduces:
$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=-\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$
we get 0=0, so this spurious solution is the one that, through taking the limit, arrives at ##v_y=V/2##.

$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$ cannot be right because ##v_x=0## implies ##v_y=0##, whether by taking limits or simply plugging in. It seems likely that it should have been $$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=-\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$.
You can avoid introducing extra solutions by dividing that through by ##v_x##, applying the binomial expansion and taking limits.
Also is my solution physically sound like is the setup logical physically
 
  • #10
haruspex said:
I am asking you to show how you got from

to

I do not see that anywhere.


Squaring introduces extra solutions. Specifically here, you are now solving
$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=\pm\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$
If we substitute ##v_x=0## in the extra solution that introduces:
$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=-\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$
we get 0=0, so this spurious solution is the one that, through taking the limit, arrives at ##v_y=V/2##.

$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$ cannot be right because ##v_x=0## implies ##v_y=0##, whether by taking limits or simply plugging in. It seems likely that it should have been $$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=-\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$.
You can avoid introducing extra solutions by dividing that through by ##v_x##, applying the binomial expansion and taking limits.
You would have to solve for v_y
 
  • #11
masteralien said:
You would have to solve for v_y
I meant divide by ##v_y##, of course.
$$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=-\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$
$$\frac{v_x^2}{Vv_y}=-\sqrt{1+(\frac{v_x}{v_y})^2}+1$$.
$$\approx-\frac 12(\frac{v_x}{v_y})^2$$
$$v_y=-V/2$$
Starting with $$\frac{v_x^2}{V}=+\sqrt{v_x^2+v_y^2}+v_y$$ does not lead to that.
 
  • #12
If ## \frac {dv_y}{dv_x} = \frac {v_x}{V} ## is true, from here it can be get that ## v_y = \frac {v_x^2}{2V} - \frac {V}{2} ##. For ## v_x=0 ## ## v_y ## will be ## -\frac {V}{2} ##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
5K