Understanding derivation of -du/dx = F

  • Thread starter Thread starter hsbhsb
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the equation F = -du/dx, where U represents potential energy. Participants clarify the misunderstanding of the relationship between ΔU and du, emphasizing that ΔU signifies a real change in potential energy, while du represents an infinitesimal change. The confusion arises from the notation and the interpretation of derivatives in the context of potential energy changes due to gravity. The correct interpretation is that taking the derivative of ΔU yields the average force over a range, and the relationship should include a negative sign, leading to ΔU = U(x) - U(x_0) = -∫(x_0 to x) F dx.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of calculus, specifically differentiation and integration.
  • Familiarity with potential energy concepts in physics.
  • Knowledge of Leibniz notation for derivatives.
  • Basic grasp of force and energy relationships in classical mechanics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the negative sign in the equation ΔU = -∫(x_0 to x) F dx.
  • Learn about the relationship between force and potential energy in gravitational fields.
  • Explore advanced calculus techniques for handling derivatives of integrals.
  • Investigate the differences between average and instantaneous quantities in physics.
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, particularly those studying mechanics, educators teaching calculus-based physics, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of the relationship between force and potential energy.

hsbhsb
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Where U is potential energy, show that F = -du/dx

Homework Equations



ΔU = U(x) - U(x_0)

$$ΔU = U(x) - U(x_0) = \int_{x_0}^{x}Fdx \qquad (1)$$

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
I am confused why
$$\frac{d}{dx}ΔU = \frac{du}{dx} \qquad (2)$$

Doesn't
$$ΔU = du \qquad (3)$$

I recognize that (3) is simple misunderstanding of calculus but for some reason I can't make sense of why it isn't true in this case.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hsbhsb said:
I am confused why
$$\frac{d}{dx}ΔU = \frac{du}{dx}$$
I'm a little confused with the notation. Is ##u## the same as ##U##?

Note that ##\frac{d}{dx}ΔU = \frac{d}{dx} \left[U(x) - U(x_0) \right]##.

Simplify this.
Hint: What is ##\frac{d}{dx} U(x_0)##?

Doesn't
$$ΔU = du $$

I recognize that (3) is simple misunderstanding of calculus but for some reason I can't make sense of why it isn't true in this case.
Why do you think it is true in this case?
 
TSny said:
Is ##u## the same as ##U##?
Yes it is meant to, my mistake for lack of clarity. From now on I will use ##dU## instead of ##du## to represent the derivative of ##U##
TSny said:
Hint: What is ##\frac{d}{dx}U(x_0)##
Does it ##=F+dU/dx##?

TSny said:
Why do you think it is true in this case?
Ok, I can see why ##ΔU \neq dU## in this case. After all, ##ΔU## represents a real change in potential, not an infinitesimally small one. But I am still having trouble understanding this algebraically and intuitively. How can you take the derivative of ##ΔU##? In a situation where all potential energy is provided by gravity, ##ΔU## does not represent a single point where gravity has a single instantaneous force, like ##U(x)## and ##U(x_0)## do. It is rather, a range. Does taking the derivative of ##ΔU## then yield an average force over that range?I think my grasp of Leibniz notation is poor.
 
You have the relation $$ΔU = U(x) - U(x_0) = \int_{x_0}^{x}Fdx $$ I believe there should be a negative sign in this relation, so that it should read $$ΔU = U(x) - U(x_0) = - \int_{x_0}^{x}Fdx $$ Think of ##x_0## as having a fixed value; but consider ##x## to be a variable. So, ##U(x_0)## is just some number (i.e., a constant), but ##U(x)## is a function of the variable ##x##.

Use rules of calculus to simplify ##\frac{d}{dx}ΔU = \frac{d}{dx}\left[ U(x) - U(x_0) \right] = -\frac{d}{dx}\int_{x_0}^{x}Fdx##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hsbhsb
I get it! Thank you :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
812
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K