Uniformly Accelerated Motion for Short Distances

Thread starter GSaldutti
Start date Sep 25, 2010
Tags

Accelerated motion Motion Short

AI Thread Summary

The equations for uniformly accelerated motion, such as Vf = V0 + at and D = (1/2)(V0 + Vf)t, are valid under certain conditions, primarily when acceleration is constant. Concerns about their applicability over long distances often stem from the assumption that acceleration may change or that external forces become significant. The definition of "long" distance is subjective and can vary based on the context of the motion being analyzed. In many practical scenarios, these equations can still provide accurate results even over extended distances, as long as the assumptions hold true. Understanding the limitations and conditions of these equations is crucial for their correct application in physics.

Sep 25, 2010

GSaldutti

Why don't these equations (and the rest in the set) work over long distances?

Vf= V₀ + at
D= (1/2)(V₀ + V_f)t
D= (V₀)(t) + (1/2)(a)(t²)
etc...

Physics news on Phys.org

Sep 25, 2010

ZapperZ

Staff Emeritus

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

Insights Author

GSaldutti said:

Why don't these equations (and the rest in the set) work over long distances?

Vf= V₀ + at
D= (1/2)(V₀ + V_f)t
D= (V₀)(t) + (1/2)(a)(t²)
etc...

Whatever gave you the idea that these do not work over long distances? How long is "long"?

Zz.

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...

View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?

View full post »

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...

View full post »