Vector calculus velocity question

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around expressing velocity as a vector equation in the context of vector calculus. Participants explore the formulation of velocity in relation to position vectors, unit vectors, and the implications of speed in vector representation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether all vector equations describing velocity must include a unit vector, citing an example from class.
  • Another participant clarifies that while unit vectors are not obligatory in velocity equations, they can facilitate geometrical descriptions.
  • A participant proposes a specific expression for velocity using a given initial point and a vector parallel to motion, questioning its correctness.
  • Another participant points out that the magnitude of the vector parallel to motion must be adjusted to match the speed, indicating the need for a scaling factor.
  • There is a discussion about the correct formulation of vector equations, with emphasis on the proper use of units and the distinction between position and velocity vectors.
  • One participant suggests a revised vector equation for position and velocity, seeking confirmation on its correctness.
  • Another participant acknowledges the need to remove the time parameter from the vector velocity if it is constant, indicating a refinement of their understanding.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of unit vectors in velocity equations and the proper formulation of vector expressions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specific expressions for velocity and the implications of using unit vectors.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the magnitude of the vector parallel to motion must be consistent with the specified speed, and there are discussions about the correct use of units in vector equations. The implications of these points are not fully resolved.

lonewolf219
Messages
186
Reaction score
2
Hi, I am not fully understanding how to express velocity as a vector equation. In an example my professor gave in class, a particle moves (in a straight line) from point A to point B (starting from t=0) and traveling at 6 m/s. The solution included a unit vector. Does that mean all vector equations describing velocity must include a unit vector?

The solution was (initial point)+[<vector>/unit vector](speed)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, they don't. From what I've perceived from your example:

[itex]\vec{r}[/itex]=[itex]\vec{r}[/itex]0+[itex]\vec{v}[/itex]t → [itex]\vec{r}[/itex]=[itex]\vec{A}[/itex]+6t[itex]\hat{r}[/itex]

Because when t=0, [itex]\vec{r}[/itex]0=[itex]\vec{A}[/itex].

And [itex]\vec{r}[/itex]B=[itex]\vec{A}[/itex]+6tB[itex]\hat{r}[/itex], with [itex]\vec{r}[/itex]B=[itex]\vec{B}[/itex]. Taking one derivative:

[itex]\vec{v}[/itex]=6[itex]\hat{v}[/itex]

Being [itex]\hat{v}[/itex] a unit vector (normed vector), like [itex]\hat{r}[/itex].
It's not obligatory to represent, in a vector equation describing velocity, the unit vector [itex]\hat{v}[/itex]. You can always replace it by [itex]\frac{\vec{v}}{|\vec{v}|}[/itex], which is the same thing.
However, it's advised to use them because they facilitate geometrical description of equations.
For example, the Newton's law of gravitational force can be written like this:

[itex]\vec{F}[/itex]g=-G(m1m2)/(r)3 [itex]\vec{r}[/itex]

Instead of the usual:

[itex]\vec{F}[/itex]g=-G(m1m2)/(r)2 [itex]\hat{r}[/itex]=|[itex]\vec{F}[/itex]g|[itex]\hat{r}[/itex]

The first one may lead you to think that [itex]\vec{F}[/itex]g [itex]\propto[/itex] r-3 but it's not, as you certainly know.
I hope I've cleared your doubt about unit vectors, if not other users may, or else explain yourself better.
 
Thanks for your explanation, Mathaholic. If A=(1, 2, 3), and the vector parallel to motion is <4, 5, 6>, and the speed is 6m/s, is it incorrect to express the velocity as

r'(t)=A+<4, 5, 6>6t

If there is an initial point, a speed and a vector, what am I missing if this is incorrect?
 
lonewolf219 said:
Thanks for your explanation, Mathaholic. If A=(1, 2, 3), and the vector parallel to motion is <4, 5, 6>, and the speed is 6m/s, is it incorrect to express the velocity as

r'(t)=A+<4, 5, 6>6t

If there is an initial point, a speed and a vector, what am I missing if this is incorrect?

If |[itex]\vec{v}[/itex]| is constant through time and [itex]\vec{v}[/itex]=[itex]\vec{const}[/itex] (straight line, as you said before), then the vector velocity is expressed as:

[itex]\vec{v}[/itex]=|[itex]\vec{v}[/itex]|[itex]\hat{v}[/itex]

Now, if there's a vector parallel to the movement (thus, to the vector velocity) and the speed is 6 m/s. Firstly, you note that the magnitude of (4,5,6) is not equal to 6, otherwise, that'd be your vector velocity. But if (4,5,6) is parallel to the velocity, then:

λ(4,5,6)=[itex]\vec{v}[/itex]

You need to determine the x,y,z coordinates of [itex]\vec{v}[/itex] using that expression and knowing its magnitude (6 m/s) and most importantly, calculating λ.
And then you'll be able to express the vector velocity as:

[itex]\vec{v}[/itex]=vx[itex]\hat{x}[/itex]+vy[itex]\hat{y}[/itex]+vz[itex]\hat{z}[/itex]

And yes, it's incorrect to express the vector velocity as:

[itex]\vec{r'(t)}[/itex]=A+(4,5,6)6t

The RHS has units of m/s and LHS has at least units of m (but never m/s!). Secondly, you cannot sum points (A) with vectors of velocity, you can only do that with vectors of position ([itex]\vec{r}[/itex]).
 
Hi Mathoholic if you're still around! Would the correct vector equations be

r'(t)=[<4,5,6>/square root77](6t)? That would make the equation v(t)=speed(velocity unit vector)?

r(t)= (1,2,3)+[<4,5,6>/square root77](6t)

Hope I've got it?
 
lonewolf219 said:
Hi Mathoholic if you're still around! Would the correct vector equations be

r'(t)=[<4,5,6>/square root77](6t)? That would make the equation v(t)=speed(velocity unit vector)?

r(t)= (1,2,3)+[<4,5,6>/square root77](6t)

Hope I've got it?

The vector position is well written. As for the vector velocity, not so much. If the speed is constant through time, then the vector velocity doesn't have the parameter time (t), as it is also the 1st derivative of the position. As for the rest, it's all good.
 
Thanks, yes, definitely, the t would not be there if I just took the derivative... appreciate your patience! See you around!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K