What is the derivation of the second equation for area velocity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Shreya
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula Velocity
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of equations related to area velocity in the context of motion in a plane, specifically focusing on the second equation. Participants explore the relationship between position and velocity vectors and their implications for area swept out over time.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the derivation of the first equation for area velocity and express uncertainty regarding the second equation. There are attempts to relate the area swept out to vector cross products and to use polar coordinates for calculations. Questions arise about the correctness of specific expressions and the reasoning behind them.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the derivation process, particularly for the first equation, while others are seeking clarification on the second equation. There is a mix of approaches being explored, with some guidance offered on using vector relationships and coordinate transformations.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working within the constraints of deriving equations based on given formulas and are questioning the assumptions related to motion in a plane. There is an emphasis on ensuring the correctness of mathematical expressions without reaching definitive conclusions.

Shreya
Messages
187
Reaction score
64
Homework Statement
I want to understand the second equation for Areal velocity as given below.
Relevant Equations
Refer below.
Screenshot from 2023-01-19 20-29-43.png
Screenshot from 2023-01-19 20-30-05.png

I think I understand how the first equation comes about.

Screenshot from 2023-01-19 20-43-16.png

In ##dt## the particle travels by ##dr##, I considered it as a triangle with altitude ##r## and base ##dr##. On dividing the area travelled in ##dt## by ##dt## we get the above equation.
A similar argument can be applied to ##\frac 1 2 \rho^2 \frac {d\phi} {dt}## as ##\rho## is same as r and ##\rho \frac {d\phi} {dt}## is same as ##\frac {dr} {dt}##

But, I am not able to understand the 2nd equation. I can provide a similar argument for ##xv_y## but can,t seem to reason any further.
Please be kind to help.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot from 2023-01-19 20-39-16.png
    Screenshot from 2023-01-19 20-39-16.png
    3.8 KB · Views: 148
Physics news on Phys.org
The unsigned area swept out in time \delta t is approximately |\delta S| \approx \tfrac12 <br /> \|\mathbf{r} \times (\mathbf{r} + \mathbf{v}\delta t)\| = <br /> \tfrac12 \|\mathbf{r} \times \mathbf{v}\| |\delta t|. This is because the magnitude of the cross-product gives the area of the parallelogram bounded by \mathbf{r} and \mathbf{r} + \mathbf{v} \delta t, and the area swept out is approximately the area of a triangle which is one half of the parallelogram. Dividing by \delta t and taking the limit \delta t \to 0 gives <br /> \left|\frac{dS}{dt}\right| = \tfrac12 \|\mathbf{r} \times \mathbf{v}\|. This is essentially the derivation of the first formula.

To derive the second, in the case of motion in the (x,y,0) plane we can calculate \frac12\|\mathbf{r} \times \mathbf{v}\| either in cartesians or in plane polars using the standard formulae \begin{split}<br /> \mathbf{r} &amp;= r\mathbf{e}_r(\theta) \\<br /> \mathbf{v} &amp;= \dot r \mathbf{e}_r(\theta) + r\dot \theta \mathbf{e}_{\theta}(\theta) \end{split} where <br /> \mathbf{e}_r(\theta) \times \mathbf{e}_\theta(\theta) \equiv \mathbf{e}_z. We can then adopt the convention that S increases in the direction of increasing \theta to remove the absolute value signs.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Shreya
pasmith said:
To derive the second, in the case of motion in the (x,y,0) plane we can calculate 12‖r×v‖ either in cartesians or in plane polars using the standard formulae r=rer(θ)v=r˙er(θ)+rθ˙eθ(θ) where er(θ)×eθ(θ)≡ez. We can then adopt the convention that S increases in the direction of increasing θ to remove the absolute value signs.
Thank You so much @pasmith !
##\vec r = x \hat i + y \hat j##
##\vec v = v_x \hat i + v_y \hat j##

##\vec r \times \vec v = (x v_y - y v_x) \hat k##
##\frac {dS} {dt} = \frac 1 2 (xv_y-yv_x)##
Is the above right?
 
Yes, the above is right
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
940
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K