Solving $\vec F = m\vec a$: How is $\vec F = -mkv$ Possible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter member 731016
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the equation of motion, specifically how the force $\vec F = -mkv$ can be derived. Participants clarify that to find acceleration, one must use calculus to take the derivative of velocity with respect to time, rather than relying on finite differences. The conversation highlights the importance of distinguishing between average and instantaneous values, with the consensus that Newton's laws apply to instantaneous quantities. One user ultimately concludes that while algebraic methods can work, calculus provides a more efficient solution. The key takeaway is that understanding the role of instantaneous vs. average values is crucial in applying Newton's laws correctly.
member 731016
Homework Statement
Please see below
Relevant Equations
Please see below
For this problem,
1676331350534.png

My working is

## \vec F = m\vec a##
## \vec F = \frac {m(v - v_i)}{\Delta t} ##
## \vec F = \frac {-mkx}{\Delta t} ##

However, the solution said ##\vec F = -mkv ##. I don't understand how this is possible since ## v ≠\frac {x}{\Delta t} ## since ##v =\frac {\Delta x}{\Delta t} ##?

Many thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Callumnc1 said:
Homework Statement:: Please see below
Relevant Equations:: Please see below

For this problem,
View attachment 322236
My working is

## \vec F = m\vec a##
## \vec F = \frac {m(v - v_i)}{\Delta t} ##
## \vec F = \frac {-mkx}{\Delta t} ##

However, the solution said ##\vec F = -mkv ##. I don't understand how this is possible since ## v ≠\frac {x}{\Delta t} ## since ##v =\frac {\Delta x}{\Delta t} ##?

Many thanks!
You do not take a finite difference, you take the derivative of v with respect to t to get acceleration.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
Frabjous said:
You do not divide by δt, you take the derivative of v with respect to t to get acceleration.
Thank you for your reply @Frabjous!

I was trying to solve this problem using the algebra definition of velocity only. It's possible to solve this problem without calculus right?

Many thanks!
 
Callumnc1 said:
It's possible to solve this problem without calculus right?
Yes, but you took the finite difference wrong. You want start with Δv/Δt.
Hint: Δvi=0 since it is a constant.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
Frabjous said:
Yes, but you took the finite difference wrong. You want start with Δv/Δt.
Hint: Δvi=0 since it is a constant.
Thank you for your reply @Frabjous !

I though ##\Delta v = v_f - v_i = v - v_i ## since they drop the ##f## for ##v##

Many thanks!
 
Callumnc1 said:
Thank you for your reply @Frabjous !

I though ##\Delta v = v_f - v_i = v - v_i ## since they drop the ##f## for ##v##

Many thanks!
vi is just a constant. It could have just as easily been labeled a. vf is not in the original problem.
Δv=Δvi-Δ(kx)
Since k is also a constant you can pull it outside the Δ.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
I wouldn't try it without calculus. Calculus is your friend here.
Might this be of help?$$a=\frac{dv}{dt}=\frac{dv}{dx}\frac{dx}{dt}=v\frac{dv}{dx}.$$
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
Callumnc1 said:
I was trying to solve this problem using the algebra definition of velocity
The "algebra definition" ##\frac{\Delta x}{\Delta t}## is for the average velocity over the time interval ##\Delta t##. You need to use the definitions of instantaneous velocity and instantaneous acceleration, which can only be expressed in calculus.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
Thank you for your replies @Frabjous, @kuruman and @haruspex !

I have figured out how solve to the problem using algebra. The calculus way as a lot faster thought!

## v_i = v(x_i) = v_i - kx_i ##
## v_f = v(x_f) = v_i - kx_f ##
## \Delta v = v_f - v_i= v_i - kx_f - (v_i - kx_i) = -kx_f + kx_i = k(x_i - x_f) = -k\Delta x ##

Then plug ##\Delta v## into Newton II to get their answer :)
 
  • #10
Callumnc1 said:
Thank you for your replies @Frabjous, @kuruman and @haruspex !

I have figured out how solve to the problem using algebra. The calculus way as a lot faster thought!

## v_i = v(x_i) = v_i - kx_i ##
## v_f = v(x_f) = v_i - kx_f ##
## \Delta v = v_f - v_i= v_i - kx_f - (v_i - kx_i) = -kx_f + kx_i = k(x_i - x_f) = -k\Delta x ##

Then plug ##\Delta v## into Newton II to get their answer :)
I assume your final steps are
##\frac{ \Delta v }{\Delta t}= -k\frac{ \Delta x }{\Delta t}##
##a=-kv##
But as I pointed out, that doesn’t quite work because the final line above should read
##a_{avg}=-kv_{avg}##, where the averages are taken over the time interval.
To get the target answer you need to apply the calculus principle of letting the deltas tend to zero.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
  • #11
haruspex said:
I assume your final steps are
##\frac{ \Delta v }{\Delta t}= -k\frac{ \Delta x }{\Delta t}##
##a=-kv##
But as I pointed out, that doesn’t quite work because the final line above should read
##a_{avg}=-kv_{avg}##, where the averages are taken over the time interval.
To get the target answer you need to apply the calculus principle of letting the deltas tend to zero.
Thank you for your reply @haruspex!

Your assumption of my finial steps is correct

I agree that I should has used average notation including ##F_{avg}##

However, would you please know why are looking for the instantaneous force not average force from the question?

Many thanks!
 
  • #12
Callumnc1 said:
However, would you please know why are looking for the instantaneous force not average force from the question?
My answer would be because Newton's law is not ##F_{avg}=ma_{avg}##. Perhaps @haruspex has some other answer.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
  • #13
kuruman said:
My answer would be because Newton's law is not ##F_{avg}=ma_{avg}##. Perhaps @haruspex has some other answer.
Thank you for your reply @kuruman !
 
  • #14
Callumnc1 said:
why are looking for the instantaneous force not average force
Because the question does not specify average it should be taken as meaning instantaneous.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
  • #15
haruspex said:
Because the question does not specify average it should be taken as meaning instantaneous.
Thank you for your reply @haruspex !
 
Back
Top