Newton's second law integration

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
47 replies · 17K views
Oblio said:
I thought we subbed F(v) out of the integral?

Yes. what do you get when you do that?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Oblio said:
t =mF(v) [tex]\int[/tex][tex]^{v}_{vo}[/tex] dv

before you take out F(v), you should replace it with Fo... so what do you get when you solve for v?
 
t= mF(o) [tex]\int[/tex][tex]^{v}_{vo}[/tex] dv

t= mF(o) (v-vo)

solve for v from here?
 
Oblio said:
t= mF(o) [tex]\int[/tex][tex]^{v}_{vo}[/tex] dv

t= mF(o) (v-vo)

solve for v from here?

Yes, one thing though, it should be m/Fo because the F(v) was in the denominator not the numerator.
 
So... why is this especially significant? They want to see some kind of comment.
Something to do with velocity dependence?
 
Oblio said:
So... why is this especially significant? They want to see some kind of comment.
Something to do with velocity dependence?

What kind of motion is it?

v = F(o)t / m + V(o)

describe the kind of motion the object is undergoing.
 
Oblio said:
the motion would be linear i believe

Yes, velocity is changing linearly. What about the acceleration?
 
Oblio said:
also constant?

yes. compare:

v = v0 + at

with

v = v0 + (Fo/m)t

the equations have the same form.
 
Oblio said:
O ya!
I can say both are linear then?

Well, linear with constant acceleration. Linear just means the object moves along a straight line.