Rearrange Formulae to Find u, v, and a

  • Thread starter Thread starter Indy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formulae
Indy
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hey there,

I was unsure as where to put this as it seems to fit into quite a few categories, however since it is primarily an algebra question I decided on the algebra forum.

I recently spent loads of time working out a formula which (if the object is steadily accelerating through a vacuum, has no outside influences, and if you know that acceleration and also the start and end velocity of the object) gives the distance the object travelled. Here's that formula:

d = \frac {v(\frac {v - u} {a} + 1)} {2}

d = distance travelled
v = final velocity
u = start velocity
a = acceleration

My first problem is that I'm wanting to rearrange the formula to make each the final velocity (v), start velocity (u) and acceleration (a) it's subject, but as of yet I haven't been able to do so.

My second question is whether I've just wasted my time doing this and there's already a formula to do what my formula does. This was the part of the post that made me unsure as to which forum to post this in as it's sort of a physics question.

Sorry if this all seems really trivial to anybody, but I'm really only formally educated up to a high school level (seeing as I'm in high school at the moment) and everything else I know is just bits and pieces I've picked up from magazines and the like. Oh and don't worry this isn't homework.

Thanks in advance.

Indy

[edit] I've just realized that it sounds very much like I'm asking you to do this for me, but I assure you I've searched high and low for a formula similar to mine and couldn't find any. Also in regards to rearranging, it would be great if you could do it for me (save me a lot of work :P), but I'd really like to learn to do this on my own, I haven't been able to find any sort of advanced rearranging tutorials anywhere, so if you know of any and can post them I'd be more than grateful.[/edit]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
There is already a formula; it is v^2=u^2+2ad or, with d as the subject, d=\frac{v^2-u^2}{2a} which you can see isn't the same as yours.

How did you derive your equation? There may be a flaw we could spot.

Here's a link to a page with this, and the other kinematic equations of motion: http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/gbssci/Phys/Class/1DKin/U1L6c.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ah :blushing: well I feel a fool.

Okay, I'll try to remember how I got through this...

Well first of all I created 2 "results" tables to check whether my final formula was right, and to help with the 'formulating' of said formula. These were with the accelerations of 10m/s^2 and 7m/s^2.

The tables went by seconds (i.e. at 1 second the distance traveled was 10m and the velocity 10m/s, then at 2 seconds distance = 30m and velocity 20m/s).

From there I tried dividing the distance by the velocity at any given second and got a sequence which increased by 0.5 every time. Which had the formula:

\frac {1} {2}n +0.5

I replaced the 'n' with 't' for time and so had the formula:

\frac {d} {v} = \frac {1} {2}t + 0.5

I then looked for formulae which included 't' and came up with:

s = \frac {d} {t}

and

a = \frac {v - u} {t}

I decided that since the formula for average speed dealt with averages, and I was wanting to be as accurate as possible, the formula for acceleration would be more suited, also seeing as it involved 'u', 'v' and 'a'.

So from there I rearranged the acceleration formula to make 't' the subject:

t = \frac {v - u} {a}

and replaced the 't' in my original equation with that formula, leaving me with:

\frac {d} {v} = \frac {1} {2}(\frac {v - u} {a}) +0.5

I moved the 'v' over to the other side to leave d by itself and then simplified the formula to get:

d = \frac {v(\frac {v - u} {a} + 1)} {2}

There, that was pretty much everything I did.

Hope this helps.

Indy.
 
Oh wait, I realize what I've done now. In simplifying the formula I got it wrong. Ack, oh well never mind. Thanks for you help.

Indy

[edit] actually wait...it works doesn't it? [/edit]
 
Last edited:
The formula for acceleration is therefore:

a= 1/(2d/v)-1 . (v-u)

Lets use an example, just say d=10, then going by the formula, v=10, u=8 and a=2 because 10((10-8)/2)+1)=20 and 20/2 obviously = 10

Therefore if we fill in the formula a= 1/(2d/v)-1 . (v-u), then we have 1/((20/10))-1 which = 1
and then 1 . (10-8) = 2 which is A.

I know this post is 3 years old, although i came across this question and couldn't help but try and solve it.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
Back
Top