Parameterised Curve Proof Part 1

  • Thread starter Thread starter bugatti79
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Curve Proof
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
73 replies · 9K views
Physics news on Phys.org
I like Serena said:
Almost! :wink:

r'(t)=v
||r'(t)||=?

The length of the vector is SRSS which is in this case v! No?
 
bugatti79 said:
The length of the vector is SRSS which is in this case v! No?

Yes. You really need to start making distinctions between vectors, scalars, infinitesimal vectors, and infinitesimal scalars. :wink:

Anyway, your arc speed is ||r'(t)||=||v||.

For your reparameterisation you want it to be 1.

So perhaps s(t) is something like s(t)=c t for some constant c.
What will the arc speed become with this parameterisation?
 
I like Serena said:
Yes. You really need to start making distinctions between vectors, scalars, infinitesimal vectors, and infinitesimal scalars. :wink:

Anyway, your arc speed is ||r'(t)||=||v||.

For your reparameterisation you want it to be 1.

So perhaps s(t) is something like s(t)=c t for some constant c.
What will the arc speed become with this parameterisation?

We are looking for r_1(s) = r(t(s)) such that ||r_1(s)||=1

IF s(t)=ct then s'(t)=c. Dont we need the reverse...t(s) etc to carry out the chain rule?
 
bugatti79 said:
We are looking for r_1(s) = r(t(s)) such that ||r_1(s)||=1

Careful with the derivatives.
You want ||r_1'(s)||=1!


bugatti79 said:
IF s(t)=ct then s'(t)=c. Dont we need the reverse...t(s) etc to carry out the chain rule?

Yes...
 
bugatti79 said:

Homework Statement



Suppose that [itex]\vec r(t)[/itex] is a parameterised curve defined for [itex]a \le t\le b[/itex] and

[itex]\displaystyle s(t)=\int_{a}^{t}\left \| d \vec r (t) \right \|dt[/itex] is the arc length function measured from r(a)

a) Prove that s'(t) = || dr(t)||

How do I start this? It is easy to see that differentiating both sides will yield the proof but I don't know how to go about t. Any clues?

Note I have this also posted at MHF with no replies
http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-help/f57/parameterised-curve-proof-part-1-a-191196.html"

We are integrating some vector valued function f(x), say.

So the integral of f(x) = F(x), which is evaluated from a to t, which is:
F(t) - F(a).
We different this then with respect to t:
dF(t)/dt - dF(a)/dt = f(t)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I like Serena said:
Careful with the derivatives.
You want ||r_1'(s)||=1!




Yes...

r'(t)=v and t'(s)=1/c implies r_1'(s)=r'(t)t'(s)=v/c but this is not a function of s anymore...?
 
Norfonz said:
We are integrating some vector valued function f(x), say.

So the integral of f(x) = F(x), which is evaluated from a to t, which is:
F(t) - F(a).
We different this then with respect to t:
dF(t)/dt - dF(a)/dt = f(t)

Yes, we got this thanks. :-)
 
bugatti79 said:
r'(t)=v and t'(s)=1/c implies r_1'(s)=r'(t)t'(s)=v/c but this is not a function of s anymore...?

Yes it is.
It is still a function of s.
It's just that there is no s in it any more.

How would you need to choose c to make sure the arc speed of r_1 is 1?
 
I like Serena said:
Yes it is.
It is still a function of s.
It's just that there is no s in it any more.

How would you need to choose c to make sure the arc speed of r_1 is 1?

We need ||r_1'(s)||/||v|| =1 ie c=1...?
 
I like Serena said:
Nooo... you need ||r_1'(s)|| =1.

Consider the parameter s to be the distance along the curve - exactly.

Well if s=ct and s is the distance and t the time then c must be the velocity ...

but we already have a velocity r'(t)=v...
 
I like Serena said:
How would you need to choose c to make sure the arc speed of r_1 is 1?

ok, but I don't understand what you mean by this?
 
I like Serena said:
Well, the arc speed of r_1 is ||r_1'(s)||.
This is the distance traveled along the curve r_1 if s increases by 1.

What is ||r_1'(s)||?

is = || r'(t) t'(s)||=||v/c||...where t(s)=s/c and r'(t)=v
 
I like Serena said:
Good!

So what does c have to be to make it 1?

The units would have to match therefore v must be equal c.
 
bugatti79 said:
Well if s=ct and s is the distance and t the time then c must be the velocity ...

but we already have a velocity r'(t)=v...

Thes units... c must be m/s and r'(t)=v which is velocity and henc also m/s...?
 
Hmm, your problem statement said nothing about m/s.
So how did you assume it would be m/s?

Anyway, even assuming the speed is in m/s, what's stopping us from defining a new curve that has a unit-less speed of 1?
 
I like Serena said:
Hmm, your problem statement said nothing about m/s.
So how did you assume it would be m/s?

Anyway, even assuming the speed is in m/s, what's stopping us from defining a new curve that has a unit-less speed of 1?

There was nothing said of m/s, I can't think of velocity being anything other than m/s!

I don't know how you would have a unit less speed. I give up :-)
 
Well, let's make a side trip into physics.
Did you know that meters and seconds are actually the same unit with a conversion factor (speed of light in vacuum) between them?
In other words, in a sense m/s is also dimensionless!

This is however not really relevant to your problem.
But if you want to give up, that's up to you of course!
 
I like Serena said:
Hmm, your problem statement said nothing about m/s.
So how did you assume it would be m/s?

Anyway, even assuming the speed is in m/s, what's stopping us from defining a new curve that has a unit-less speed of 1?

c would have to be 1 to make ||r_1(t)||=1 if v is dimensionless.
 
You wrote before that ||r_1'(s)|| = ||v/c||
So if c = 1, then ||r_1'(s)|| = ||v||, which is presumably not 1.

Btw, you seem to have dropped a quote that should have been there to indicate the derivative.
And you also seem to have replaced the parameter s of r_1(s) by t.
Really!
 
I like Serena said:
You wrote before that ||r_1'(s)|| = ||v/c||
So if c = 1, then ||r_1'(s)|| = ||v||, which is presumably not 1.

Btw, you seem to have dropped a quote that should have been there to indicate the derivative.
And you also seem to have replaced the parameter s of r_1(s) by t.
Really!

Well, I think I have exhausted all my possible answers based on my understanding. I don't know h0w ||r_1'(s)||=1 if c is not 1.
 
I like Serena said:
Well, if v is a vector and c is a scalar, what if c=||v||?

And if you want, you can let v keep a unit of [m/s] and have c be dimensionless.
That should satisfy your sense of what speed should be.

hmm... so if s(t) is the distance along the curve r_1(s) we would have s(t)=||v||t?

So in a nutshell we were finding a suitable expression for the distance s(t) such that we can maintain the requirement that ||r_1'(s)||=1 for all s?


Is it a similar approach for this last exercise?

reparameterise the curve r(t)=2cos(t)i+2cos(t)j+tk by it arc length. start at t=0
 
bugatti79 said:
hmm... so if s(t) is the distance along the curve r_1(s) we would have s(t)=||v||t?

Uummm... s(t) depends on a parameter t that is not in r_1(s)...
But I think what you mean is probably right.

I'd say it something like this:

s is the length of the curve r_1 from 0 to s.

With s(t) = ||v||t, the curve r(t(s)) has this property.


bugatti79 said:
So in a nutshell we were finding a suitable expression for the distance s(t) such that we can maintain the requirement that ||r_1'(s)||=1 for all s?

Yes.

bugatti79 said:
Is it a similar approach for this last exercise?

reparameterise the curve r(t)=2cos(t)i+2cos(t)j+tk by it arc length. start at t=0

Yes.
 
bugatti79 said:
Is it a similar approach for this last exercise?

reparameterise the curve r(t)=2cos(t)i+2cos(t)j+tk by it arc length. start at t=0

||r'(t)||=||-2sin(t)-2sin(t)+1||=(-4sin(t)+1)^(1/2).

If we let s(t)=ct then using the same idea we must have c=(-4sin(t)+1)^0.5 in order for ||r_1'(s)||=1...?