Ray optics: velocity of image reflected off a moving mirror

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the concept of image velocity in relation to a moving mirror, specifically addressing the equation Vm=(Vo+Vi)/2 and its application. It is clarified that the image appears at rest with respect to the ground when considering instantaneous velocities, despite the object moving towards the mirror. The confusion arises from mixing frames of reference, where the observer's position relative to the mirror affects perceived velocities. The conversation emphasizes that a flat mirror serves as a plane of symmetry, resulting in the image moving away at double the speed of the object when the object moves away from the mirror. Understanding relative motion is crucial for accurately interpreting these dynamics.
Zayan
Messages
63
Reaction score
7
Homework Statement
The mirror velocity is 2 î m/s, object velocity is 4 î m/s. We have to find the velocity of the image.
Relevant Equations
Vm= (Vo + Vi)/2.
Here Vm= Vel. of mirror, Vo= Vel. of object, Vi= Vel. of image. All in ground reference.
Using equation, Vm=(Vo+Vi)/2;
2= (4+Vi)/2
=>Vi=0.
I.e, image velocity is zero.
I can't understand how it is possible that the image is at rest wrt ground. If the object moves with more velocity than the mirror, wouldn't it collide with the mirror at some point? And plus the object is moving 2m/s wrt the mirror so how is the image at rest wouldn't it move with 2m/s in the opposite direction?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are looking for the instantaneous velocity of the image when the object is at distance ##d_o## from the mirror. What happens in the long run is not an issue.

Secondly, where did you get the equation Vm=(Vo+Vi)/2 ? Why is it relevant to this case?
 
kuruman said:
You are looking for the instantaneous velocity of the image when the object is at distance ##d_o## from the mirror. What happens in the long run is not an issue.

Secondly, where did you get the equation Vm=(Vo+Vi)/2 ? Why is it relevant to this case?
My prof. derived it using relative velocities and it's also in my physics book. It's relevant because two velocities are given so we can easily get the third using this relation.
 
Zayan said:
. . . so how is the image at rest wouldn't it move with 2m/s in the opposite direction?
Having a formula that gives you a number does not necessarily mean that you understand the relative motion of mirrors and images.

Imagine being an observer at rest with respect the mirror, i.e. moving to the right at 2 m/s relative to the ground. You see the object to your left coming towards you at 2 m/s and the image to your right also coming towards you at 2 m/s. You would say that the mirror has velocity ##\mathbf{v}_m=0~\mathbf{\hat i}~##m/s, that the object has velocity ##\mathbf{v}_o=2~\mathbf{\hat i}~##m/s and that the image has velocity ##\mathbf{v}_i=-2~\mathbf{\hat i}~##m/s.

Now imagine that you are at rest relative to the ground. To each of the velocities above you would have to add the mirror's velocity relative to the ground. What do you get?
 
kuruman said:
Having a formula that gives you a number does not necessarily mean that you understand the relative motion of mirrors and images.

Imagine being an observer at rest with respect the mirror, i.e. moving to the right at 2 m/s relative to the ground. You see the object to your left coming towards you at 2 m/s and the image to your right also coming towards you at 2 m/s. You would say that the mirror has velocity ##\mathbf{v}_m=0~\mathbf{\hat i}~##m/s, that the object has velocity ##\mathbf{v}_o=2~\mathbf{\hat i}~##m/s and that the image has velocity ##\mathbf{v}_i=-2~\mathbf{\hat i}~##m/s.

Now imagine that you are at rest relative to the ground. To each of the velocities above you would have to add the mirror's velocity relative to the ground. What do you get?
Thank you. I got a lot confused by using relative velocities. I imagined it to be negative 2m/s as I mixed ground frame with mirror's frame.
 
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban and kuruman
Zayan said:
I got a lot confused by using relative velocities.
In future cases, you could convert the given velocities to distances, in order to make the problem less confusing.
Just multiply each velocity by a common period of time.

The thing here is that a flat mirror acts like a plane of symmetry between object and virtual image.
The virtual distance between you and your mirror image is always double the actual distance between you and the surface of the mirror, regardless any relative movement in the direction perpendicular to the mirror's surface.

That is equivalent to state that if you walk away from a flat mirror (anchored at a fixed location), it will look to you that your image is walking away from you at double your speed rate.

plane-mirror-image.gif
 
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Back
Top