Velocity versus speed and philosophizing thereof

  • Thread starter Thread starter Head_Unit
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Speed Velocity
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the distinction between velocity and speed, emphasizing that velocity is a vector quantity that includes direction, while speed is a scalar that does not. Students initially defined velocity as displacement divided by time and speed as distance divided by time, which reflects an understanding of the formulas but lacks clarity on the concept of direction. The importance of distinguishing between displacement and distance is highlighted, as displacement is defined by direction, whereas distance is not. The conversation suggests that students may benefit from further exploration of these concepts to solidify their understanding. Ultimately, clear comprehension of displacement, distance, and their implications is essential before delving deeper into the topic of velocity.
Head_Unit
Messages
43
Reaction score
2
I asked a class of students what the difference was of velocity versus speed. The answer I was looking for was "direction" i.e. one is a vector. But a number of them said "Velocity is displacement divided by time, and speed is distance divided by time." Ignoring the second half of that assertion, I'm not sure what to say about the statement…because that is exactly what the equation says! (V=deltaX/t). To complicate things, "velocity" is ofttimes used colloquially and not in such a picky way. What would you say to the students who responded like this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would ask them what the difference is between displacement and distance. If the answer included that displacement involves direction (ie moved 10 metres to the East) whereas distance doesn't (ended up 10 metres from where it started), then I think the answer is good. They would still have captured the idea that velocity involves direction whereas speed does not.
 
In this case, displacement is "how far you are from where you started" so I don't believe they are thinking about direction very explicitly. Probably they are just looking at the formula --> I can't say the answer is wrong, but it's not really right. I guess one thing I could do is to dissect that and say "note that displacement implies a DIRECTION"...
 
I think that before discussing velocity you should make sure they understand the difference between displacement, distance and distance traveled.
 
Perhaps ask them about situations where after some time the displacement is zero again.
 
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...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
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?

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Back
Top