Time independent acceleration equation?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the validity of a differential equation for time-independent acceleration. It highlights that the original equation presented is incorrect due to unit inconsistencies, as dV/dt represents acceleration while dV/(V dx) has units of inverse length. A suggested correction is dV/dx = (1/V)dV/dt, which aligns with the proper dimensional analysis. The participant acknowledges their mistake and clarifies the correct relationship as a = dV/dt = V dV/dx. This exchange emphasizes the importance of unit consistency in physics equations.
re444
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hi,

Is this differential equation valid for time independent acceleration"

a = dV/dt = dV/ (V dx) = ( dV / dx ) * (1/V) ?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
re444 said:
d = dV/dt = dV/ (V dx) = ( dV / dx ) * (1/V) ?
It's not quite clear what you're doing here. dV/dt has units of acceleration, while dV/(V dx) has units of 1/length. So your equation isn't valid.

Perhaps you're thinking of dV/dx = (1/V)dV/dt ?
 
Doc Al said:
It's not quite clear what you're doing here. dV/dt has units of acceleration, while dV/(V dx) has units of 1/length. So your equation isn't valid.

Perhaps you're thinking of dV/dx = (1/V)dV/dt ?

Oh ! my obvious fault: a = dV / dt = dV/ (dx / V) = V dV/dx .

thanks
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
6K
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
957
Replies
12
Views
1K
Back
Top