Vt=d doesn't seem to hold true w/ constant acceleration

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of kinematic equations under constant acceleration, specifically examining the relationship between distance, time, and velocity. Participants explore the validity of the equation \( vt = d \) when acceleration is present, questioning the assumptions behind the calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant calculates distance and velocity under constant acceleration and arrives at a contradiction when integrating to find distance, suggesting that \( \frac{d}{t} = v \) only holds true if there is zero acceleration.
  • Another participant proposes that the equation \( d = vt \) is only valid when velocity is constant, implying that it cannot be applied when acceleration is present.
  • A later reply questions whether the conclusion that "constant velocity" equates to "zero acceleration" is accurate, indicating a potential misunderstanding of the concepts involved.
  • Participants discuss the implications of using average velocity in the context of integration, suggesting that this may clarify some of the discrepancies noted in the calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus. There are competing views regarding the validity of using \( vt = d \) under conditions of constant acceleration, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of acceleration on the relationship between distance, time, and velocity.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the assumption of initial velocity and position, as well as the potential misunderstanding of the relationship between constant velocity and zero acceleration. The discussion highlights the complexity of applying kinematic equations in varying conditions.

Ocata
Messages
198
Reaction score
5
Hello,Lets say I start off with constant acceleration of 1 m/s^2, and I want to evaluate it at 3 seconds.

a = 1.
a(3) = 1

then, since at=v,

v(t) = at = 1(3) = 3m/s then I can work backward v/t = a = 3/3 = 1

then, since vt = d

d(t) = vt = 3(3) = 9 then I can work backward d/t= v = 9m/3s = 3m/sThis way, the units make sense acceleration is 1 m/s/s

Take 9 meters. Divide it by 3 seconds. Then divide it again by 3 seconds. And voila, you arrive back at 1m/s/s

_______

However, if I integrate acceleration to get the kinematic equations, it all seems to fall apart and I don't know why.

[itex]\int a (dt) = at +v_0 = v_f[/itex] ,

so evaluating time = 3 with acceleration 1m/s^2,

v(3) = 1(3)+0 = 3m/s then I can work backward v/t = a = 3/3 = 1 => all good still

then

[itex]\int v (dt) = \frac{1}{2}at^2 +v_0(t)+r_0= r_f[/itex],

[itex]r(3) = \frac{1}{2}(1)3^2+0+0=4.5[/itex] so if I work backward this time d/t=v = 4.5/3= 1.5 m/s


But my velocity is 3m/s, not 1.5m/s

So my conclusion is, Distance/Time = Velocity will only hold true if there is 0 acceleration. Is this correct?

 
Physics news on Phys.org
Or if v is average velocity.

Edit: which is what you get from integrating.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ocata
Ocata said:
Hello,Lets say I start off with constant acceleration of 1 m/s^2, and I want to evaluate it at 3 seconds.

a = 1.
a(3) = 1

then, since at=v,

v(t) = at = 1(3) = 3m/s then I can work backward v/t = a = 3/3 = 1

then, since vt = d

Nope. This is wrong. This is only true if v is a constant. Since your acceleration is not zero, v is NOT a constant, so this is incorrect.

Think about it, If you have a constant v, you use this equation. You have a non-constant v, you ALSO used this equation. Something's got to give because it can't both be correct.

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ocata
Hi ZapperZ,

Thank you for responding.

May I ask, which part is wrong exactly? I am betting that just the first part is wrong and that the second part (which contradicts the first part) is correct, since my final conclusion is:

Ocata said:
So my conclusion is, Distance/Time = Velocity will only hold true if there is 0 acceleration. Is this correct?

I feel that by the end of the work, you are in agreement with my final conclusion. But maybe that you are correcting another point I have missed.

When solving for velocity using each formula, at = v = 3m/s and at + v_0 = 3m/s,

both arrive at the correct answer, but this is only when assuming initial velocity is 0.

But it breaks down when solving for distance, regardless of whether I have initial velocity or initial position.

Is saying "constant velocity" the same thing as saying "0 acceleration."?
 
Ocata said:
Hi ZapperZ,

Thank you for responding.

May I ask, which part is wrong exactly? I am betting that just the first part is wrong and that the second part (which contradicts the first part) is correct, since my final conclusion is:

Look at the last line I quoted in your post. The use of d=vt is invalid for varying v.

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ocata
Thank you. Much appreciated.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K