Newtons work and double derivative.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of derivatives in the context of Newtonian mechanics, specifically exploring the idea of the third derivative of position, known as "jerk." Participants examine why Newton did not formally define a quantity for this derivative and its implications in understanding motion, particularly in scenarios involving changing acceleration.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant humorously questions why Newton did not define a third derivative of acceleration, suggesting that all motions can be described using distance, velocity, and acceleration.
  • Another participant identifies the third derivative of distance as "jerk," explaining its relevance in analyzing non-constant acceleration, particularly in practical scenarios like riding in a bus.
  • A different participant emphasizes that the absence of a third derivative in some texts indicates oversimplification, asserting that changes in force lead to changes in acceleration, resulting in a jerk.
  • One participant reiterates the definition of jerk and its application in various real-world situations, linking it to the experience of sudden changes in acceleration.
  • Another participant notes that while acceleration due to gravity is often treated as constant, it can vary with distance from the Earth, suggesting that jerk may be relevant in certain contexts, particularly for larger objects.
  • A final participant argues that Newton's equations adequately describe classical mechanics without the need for higher derivatives, citing Occam's principle as a reason for not introducing unnecessary concepts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity and relevance of the third derivative in Newtonian mechanics. While some acknowledge its importance in specific contexts, others argue that Newton's framework sufficiently addresses motion without it. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the necessity of introducing higher derivatives.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight limitations in the treatment of acceleration as constant, noting that gravitational acceleration can vary with distance. There is also a recognition that the discussion may oversimplify complex scenarios involving changing forces and accelerations.

vkash
Messages
316
Reaction score
1
I have read kinematics and laws of motion(1st,second and third). In these two chapters one thing i found that
firstly distance is taken as first assumption.then it's derivative as velocity OK.
then it's(velocity) derivative is taken as acceleration OK.
Then it's derivative(acceleration) is not taken!. but why he(our hero Newton) stops at acceleration why not create another quantity named say X which is derivative of acceleration. Is he leave it for vikash(me) to do hahaha LOL!(joke)
all derivative are with respect to time.
I have an answer for my own question.
(1) all motions can be defined on the basis of these three quantities.(mention am i correct here)

we all have felt force either due to gravity or due to lifts. when lift moves upward with due to changing velocity we feel extra force. How it feels of having changing acceleration? I mean if a lift is moving upwards with acceleration 2t (t is time). time varying acceleration. then how will it feel.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The 3rd derivative of distance is called 'jerk' and it is often used in analysis of non-constant acceleration, such as in harmonic systems. If you think about the effect of a change in acceleration, as when standing in a bus and starts up, you are jerked, hence the name.

When considering acceleration due to gravity, the acceleration is constant and therefore the 3rd derivative, jerk, is zero. All of the mechanics work by Newton, that I'm aware of, was dealing with gravity as the acceleration force, or another constant value force, thus no need for the 3rd derivative.
 
The fact that your book does not take a derivative of acceleration with respect to time just means that your book is over-simplified. The third derivative of position with respect to time (or the derivative of acceleration with respect to time) is known as the "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerk_%28physics%29" " and is very important. If you think about it, F = ma tells us that whenever a force changes in time, then the acceleration changes in time and there is a jerk. Examples of the force changing in time would be: pressing the gas pedal of a car from half-way down to all the way down, having a cord break while Bungee jumping, accelerating down a hill on a bicycle and hitting a rock, etc. It is called a jerk because it feels like a jerk.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DickL said:
The 3rd derivative of distance is called 'jerk' and it is often used in analysis of non-constant acceleration, such as in harmonic systems. If you think about the effect of a change in acceleration, as when standing in a bus and starts up, you are jerked, hence the name.

When considering acceleration due to gravity, the acceleration is constant and therefore the 3rd derivative, jerk, is zero. All of the mechanics work by Newton, that I'm aware of, was dealing with gravity as the acceleration force, or another constant value force, thus no need for the 3rd derivative.

The acceleration due to gravity is only constant as a local approximation. The gravitational force (and thus the acceleration) depends on the separation of the two objects. Objects farther away from the Earth experience less of its gravity and have a lower acceleration. But this spatial variation in gravitational force is so small for human-sized objects that the jerk can be ignored. For larger, farther objects such as comets, the change in acceleration becomes important.
 
Newton's equations fully describe the behaviour of (classical) cellestial mechanical system using position, velocity and acceleration with no need to use higher derivatives.

"why he(our hero Newton) stops at acceleration why not create another quantity"
Bacause he (contrary to many people) obeyed Occam's principle: don't create non-necessary entities.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
5K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K