Total distance traveled with calculus

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the total distance traveled by a particle described by the motion equation s = t² - 5t + 6. The velocity at two and three seconds is found to be -1 m/s and 1 m/s, respectively, while the acceleration is constant at 2 m/s². The key issue raised is the apparent contradiction of having zero displacement at both t = 2 and t = 3 seconds despite non-zero velocity, which is explained by the particle changing direction. The total distance covered can be determined by summing individual displacements over relevant time intervals, rather than arbitrary ones. The confusion about the book's answer of 6.5 m highlights the importance of understanding the relationship between displacement and distance traveled.
albertrichardf
Messages
165
Reaction score
11

Homework Statement


Suppose a particle responds to this equation of motion: s = t2 - 5t + 6
a) find the velocity at two seconds and three seconds
b) find the acceleration
c) find the total distance covered after 3 seconds

Homework Equations


s = t2 - 5t + 6
v = ds/dt = 2t - 5
a = dv/dt = 2

The Attempt at a Solution


ai) 2t - 5 = 4 - 5 = -1
aii) 2t - 5 = 6 - 5 = 1
(everything is fine here)

b) a = 2

c) The equation given above is for position, since it uses velocity. Is it actually possible to find the distance covered from the displacement?
I also tried finding the position at t = 1, t = 2 and t = 3 to find the distance.
at t = 1, s = 2
at t = 2, s = 4 - 10 + 6 = 0
at t = 3, s = 9 - 15 + 6 = 0
How is it possible that the displacement is 0 twice consecutively if the velocity is non-zero? Isn't that impossible?

I was actually going to calculate the displacement each time then add all together. The book had also already given an answer: 6.5m, although I'm not sure of how they got that.

Thanks for any answers.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Look at the graph s=t^2 - 5t + 6
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Albertrichardf said:
How is it possible that the displacement is 0 twice consecutively if the velocity is non-zero? Isn't that impossible?
The velocity is non-zero but it's direction changed
 
Start from t=0 and keep in mind that the velocity is changing so the object will go one way, stop, and come back covering the same ground again explaining why the position at t=2 seconds coincides with the position at t = 3 seconds.
 
Albertrichardf; said:
Is it actually possible to find the distance covered from the displacement?
I also tried finding the position at t = 1, t = 2 and t = 3 to find the distance
Yes, distance through whch the wheels have turned can be found by adding up a number of individual displacements. But you don't calculate those separate displacements by dividing the trip according to some arbitrary time interval chosen because of convenience to you. The necessary time intervals are dictated by some characteristic of the motion itself.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top