Shahar
- 43
- 2
SammyS said:Really ?
(dv/dt) (dr/dr) = (dr/dt) (dv/dr) ?
The Calculus gods have just gone nuts !
The link. Not this site.Sorry my english isn't that good.
SammyS said:Really ?
(dv/dt) (dr/dr) = (dr/dt) (dv/dr) ?
The Calculus gods have just gone nuts !
You can substitute u = sqrt(r / (r0-r))Shahar said:The answer in the site isn't very helpful.
rcgldr said:a = dv/dt = (dv/dt) (dr/dr) = (dr/dt) (dv/dr) = v dv/dr
SammyS said:Really ?
I'm familiar with the chain rule.rcgldr said:rcgldr said:a = dv/dt = (dv/dt) (dr/dr) = (dr/dt) (dv/dr)
Chain rule, wiki link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_rule
This is used when acceleration is a function of distance (instead of time), acceleration = a(r) = - G M / r^2.
Good suggestion. I will go back and delete and edit where appropriate. In the Country where the OP lives, it is a little before sunrise now, so maybe he hasn't seen any of the posts yet.rcgldr said:Maybe if I had paid attention to the thread title ... (brain fade on my part). In that case, can you delete all of the posts with the solutions? Or if you give me an OK, I can go back and empty out all my previous posts, leaving a comment about waiting for feedback. Perhaps the OP hasn't visited this thread since those posts were added.
mfb said:Converting a(x) to a(t) is difficult, and requires finding the time (and everything else) first. The correct approach is in the thread now, you just have to integrate it. If you don't know how to calculate integrals then I don't see a way to solve the problem.
mfb said:Converting a(x) to a(t) is diffi
mfb said:Converting a(x) to a(t) is difficult, and requires finding the time (and everything else) first. The correct approach is in the thread now, you just have to integrate it. If you don't know how to calculate integrals then I don't see a way to solve the problem.
If you don't understand differentials, how can you say that you have done an integration? Have you learned how to do integration in your courses yet? Have you learned about doing integrations by using algebraic or trigonometric substitution?Shahar said:II integrated a(x) and it gave me , well...IIts not the average velocity.
I integrated a(x) and v(x). The big problem is that I don't really understand differentials.
Chestermiller said:If you don't understand differentials, how can you say that you have done an integration? Have you learned how to do integration in your courses yet? Have you learned about doing integrations by using algebraic or trigonometric substitution?
Chet
Chestermiller said:What about doing it graphically? Is that allowed?
Chet
mfb said:Don't integrate v(x), integrate 1/v(x).
rcgldr said:This problem starts off with an equation for acceleration as a function of position. The sequence here is to generate an equation for velocity as a function of position, then time as a function of position, then invert this to an equation for position as a function of time, take the derivative to get velocity as a function of time, and another derivative to get acceleration as a function of time. However at some point in this process, you may not be able to continue, either due to an equation that can't be integrated, or an equation for time as a function of position that can't be inverted to an equation for position as a function of time.
If you wan't to get an idea of how this process works, try a simpler case like a(x) = -x (acceleration as a function of position), with an initial position of 0 and initial velocity of 1.
Well you already have the solution for time versus position in post #28 (the link to the math site), but in the form of a very complicated equation resulting from integration of velocity versus position. update - the rest of this post about substitutions was moved to post #50 to combine the important equations into a single post.Shahar said:My question is not homework. I just wanted to find the precise time it takes to an object moving with changing gravitational acceloration to get from A to B.
Yeah, its impossible to get v(t). I'm now just searching for x(t).rcgldr said:This problem starts off with an equation for acceleration as a function of position. The sequence here is to generate an equation for velocity as a function of position, then time as a function of position, then invert this to an equation for position as a function of time, take the derivative to get velocity as a function of time, and another derivative to get acceleration as a function of time. However at some point in this process, you may not be able to continue, either due to an equation that can't be integrated, or an equation for time as a function of position that can't be inverted to an equation for position as a function of time.
If you wan't to get an idea of how this process works, try a simpler case like a(x) = -x (acceleration as a function of position), with an initial position of 0 and initial velocity of 1.
You need to get t(r) first, by integrating the equation you got in post #3, which I redid in post #28.Shahar said:I'm now just searching for x(t). I know there are a lot of solutions here but I don't really understand them. I think I have to get to them myself to fully understand this.
Chestermiller said:Hi Shahar,
Are you still out there, and are you still interested in pursuing the solution to this problem? Is anyone else out there interested in having rcgldr help them do this integration? rcgldr would like to complete the solution so that he does not have to save it in his computer files. If I don't hear back from someone on this by Monday, I'm going to release rcgldr to provide his analysis. Then I'm going to close this thread.
Chet
Thanks. Personally, I don't see how you could get the time without automatically also getting X(t) as a byproduct, but that's just me.Shahar said:I found a way to get the time.But because I have to learn more calculus I can't derive an X(t) function.
So I think rcgldr can release his analysis now.
Chestermiller said:Thanks. Personally, I don't see how you could get the time without automatically also getting X(t) as a byproduct, but that's just me.
OK, regldr. You're free to proceed.
Chet
Why don't you show us what you did and how you arrived at your final answer? Then we can compare it with what rcgldr got by integration.Shahar said:I used averages(V , a) .
If I just combine all of the steps into one big expression, would it be an X(t) equation?
OK. What you basically did here was to use a very crude approximation to the average velocity, equal to half the final velocity. This would not give a very accurate result for Δt. Please tell us what your result for Δt was so that we can compare it with what rcgldr got by doing the integration exactly.Shahar said:Using conversation of energy I found V(r) => Vfinal.
And I know the function a(r) = G × M / r2.
So when V0 = 0 ,∫ a(r) dr = (Vfinal * Δt)*(Δt/Vavg) = Vfinal * Vavg.
Δt = Δx/Vavg.
Chestermiller said:OK. What you basically did here was to use a very crude approximation to the average velocity, equal to half the final velocity. This would not give a very accurate result for Δt. Please tell us what your result for Δt was so that we can compare it with what rcgldr got by doing the integration exactly.
Chet
In post #45, you indicated that you had tried plotting 1/v as a function of r, and integrating graphically to get the area under the curve, but that didn't work. Can you elaborate on this? Can you furnish the plot? We would like to find out why it didn't work for you. (It should have).Shahar said:I got 2000 seconds, which is the only answer that is in the limit 1414 < t < 2828 seconds.
I found that the average accelerationis 5 m/s. a0 = 2.5 m/s2 and af = 10 m/s2.
I rejected this idea twice already but becuse it's the on;y one that gives an answer in the limit I tried it again.
The answer is a bit too small, isn't it?
EDIT: I can't find any material about differentials in physics. Most of the stuff on the internet is a bit too complex for me.
Do you know a simple explanation for differentials in physics?
Chestermiller said:In post #45, you indicated that you had tried plotting 1/v as a function of r, and integrating graphically to get the area under the curve, but that didn't work. Can you elaborate on this? Can you furnish the plot? We would like to find out why it didn't work for you. (It should have).
Chet