Question about two-variable function

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Zula110100100
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the differentiation of a two-variable function X(a,t) = 0.5at², where both a and t are expressed as functions of a variable F. Participants explore how to express X in terms of F and subsequently differentiate it to understand how X changes with respect to F. The conversation includes aspects of mathematical reasoning and conceptual clarification related to the relationships between the variables involved.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose substituting a(F) = F - g and t(F) = gT/F into the function X to express it solely in terms of F and constants.
  • One participant presents a derived expression for x(F) and its derivative x'(F), seeking confirmation of its correctness.
  • Another participant suggests that keeping the terms separate in the expression for x(F) is preferable for clarity.
  • There is a discussion about whether the differentiation is necessary for the subsequent steps in solving for F in terms of g, X, and T.
  • One participant questions the derivation of the equation gX = Fx, seeking clarification on its origin and relevance to the problem.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the energy input into the system is valid only if the force F is constant and acts in the same direction as the displacement x.
  • Further elaboration is provided on the relationship between kinetic and potential energy in the context of the forces acting on the system.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of differentiation and the validity of certain equations. There is no consensus on the correctness of the final expressions or the approach to solving for F, indicating multiple competing views remain.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the assumptions regarding the constancy of g and T, as well as the conditions under which the energy equations are valid. The discussion does not resolve the mathematical steps involved in deriving the final expressions.

Zula110100100
Messages
250
Reaction score
0
If I have X(a,t) = .5at2 and a and t were both functions of F
a(F) = F-g
t(F) = gT/F

and I wanted to know how much X changes with respect to F, how would I do that?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are g and T constant?
 
yes, they are
 
First step substitute (F - g) for a and gT/F for t to get x in terms of F and the constants.
 
Oh, so is this right?

x(F)= g2T2/2F - g3T2/2F2
x(F) = g2T2/2(F-1-gF-2)
x'(F) = g2T2/2(-F-2+2gF-3)
 
Zula110100100 said:
x(F)= g2T2/2F - g3T2/2F2
QUOTE]

It is better if one leaves the two terms separate as above.
 
Okay, so
x(F) = g2T2/2F - g3T2/2F2
x'(F) = -g2T2/2F2 + g3T2/F3

That is correct?
 
I would have a line showing

[itex]\frac{g^{2}T^{2}F^{-1}}{2}[/itex] - [itex]\frac{g^{3}T^{2}F^{-2}}{2}[/itex]
 
Your differentiation is correct.
 
  • #10
Right, that is before taking the derivative?

I am not sure if I need to take the derivative now, so I guess let me lay it on ya

gT = Ft
gX = Fx

a = F-g
t = gT/F

x = 1/2at2
x = g2T2F-1/2 - g3T2F-2/2

If I am trying to find F for a given g, X, and T

I could just put x = gX/F in for x and get

gF-1X = g2T2F-1/2 - g3T2F-2/2
divide by gF-1
gives me
X=gT2/2 - g2T2F-1/2
multiply by F and rearrange a bit to get
gT2F/2 - FX = g2T2/2

pull out F for F((gT2-2X)/2) = g2T2/2

divide for

F = g2T2/(gT2-2X)

Any of that look right?
 
  • #11
I do not know what you are doing now.

Your final line x'(F) = -g2T2/2F2 + g3T2/F3

was ok. That is you were asked to find dX/dF and you found it because your differentiation was ok.
 
  • #12
Right, the last post was not using the derivative, I might not need to.

If the non-differentiated version is correct, and i know the equation
gX = Fx
can I not solve for x = gX/F
substitute that back into the equation I had gotten for x(F), and then I have F in terms of only g, X, and T, getting rid of x and t?

The resultant equation should be correct to give me F for a given g, X and T, right?
 
  • #13
From where did you get gX = Fx?
 
  • #14
Right, so what I am looking at here is g = gravity, X is the total displacement, F is a force that is greater than and opposite to gravity, and x is a distance less than X, at s=0 the velocity is 0 and s=X the velocity is 0, so the potential energy given by gX must equal the energy put into the system Fx

Or to keep this as he math sub-forum, it is a given from post#10
 
Last edited:
  • #15
Energy put in system will be given by Fx ONLY if F is constant and if F is in the same direction of the displacement x.
 
  • #16
Which they both indeed are
 
  • #17
A constant force F whose magnitude is greater than that of gravity, is working against gravity to give a displacement of x, it gains (F-g)x kinetic energy, and gx potential energy is put into the system. At that point F drops to 0, so the system's energy remains constant, it's kinetic energy is put into potential energy by gravity until KE reaches 0, and (F-g)x+gx = gX which reduces to Fx = gX
 
  • #18
It is getting rather late over here...Sorry.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K