Undergrad What is the position of this moving particle over time?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mike_bb
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the kinematic equation of motion for a moving particle represented by the function f(t) = t². It clarifies that the derivative f'(t) = 0 only at t = 0, indicating that the particle is at position 0 solely at that instant. The confusion between the differential dt and the finite change Δt is addressed, emphasizing that dt is not a finite unit of time. The conversation also touches on the implications of derivatives in the context of non-standard analysis versus traditional physics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of kinematic equations and motion
  • Familiarity with calculus, specifically derivatives and differentials
  • Knowledge of the concepts of finite and infinitesimal quantities
  • Basic principles of real analysis and its application in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the Archimedean principle in real analysis
  • Learn about the differences between differentials (dt) and finite changes (Δt)
  • Explore the concept of derivatives and their physical interpretations in motion
  • Investigate non-standard analysis and its application in physics
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, mathematicians, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of motion and calculus, particularly those exploring the intersection of traditional and non-standard analysis.

Mike_bb
Messages
191
Reaction score
19
I think up following example.

Let we have kinematic equation of motion for moving particle: ##f(t)=t^2##.

##df(t)/dt=2t## and ##df(t)=2tdt##

For ##t=0## we have ##df(t)=0dt##.

1)My first question is: is it true that moving particle has position f'(t)=0 ##0## from ##0## to ##dt## time?

2)My second question is: if 1) is true then how is it possible that moving particle has position at ##dt##: ##f(dt)=dt^2## but not ##0##?

What is position of moving particle accurate?

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
1) No. ##f'(t)=0## only at ##t=0##
2) is then a non-starter

##\ ##
 
BvU said:
1) No. ##f'(t)=0## only at ##t=0##
2) is then a non-starter

##\ ##
I edited first message : Is it true that moving particle has position ##0## from ##0## to ##dt## time?
 
Mike_bb said:
I edited first message :
Just a Mentor Note -- it is best to just post a new reply with the correction, since going back and changing things that have been pointed out as incorrect can really confuse future readers of the thread. If you do make a correction to an earlier post, it is best to at least use "strikethrough" to line out the incorrect item and then post the correction with a note about the change. Thanks.
 
Mike_bb said:
I edited first message : Is it true that moving particle has position ##0## from ##0## to ##dt## time?
First, ##dt## is not a finite unit of time. ##dt## is a differential. A finite unit of time is usually written as ##\Delta t##. There is often confusion between ##\Delta t## and ##dt##, which causes problems.

Second, consider the function ##f(t) = t^2## as a mathematical object. You can draw its graph. This function is only zero for ##t = 0## and is greater than zero for ##t > 0##. This shouldn't be problematic.

Note that:
$$f(0) = 0, f'(0) = 0, f''(0) = 2$$So, although the derivative of ##f## at 0 is zero, the second derivative is not zero. You can extend this by considering ##f(t) = t^3, t^4 \dots##. In each case, more and more derivatives of the function are zero at ##t=0##, but eventually some nth derivative is not zero.

If ALL derivatives of a function were zero at ##0##, then the function would be identically zero. But, not if only the first derivative is zero.
 
PeroK said:
First, ##dt## is not a finite unit of time. ##dt## is a differential. A finite unit of time is usually written as ##\Delta t##. There is often confusion between ##\Delta t## and ##dt##, which causes problems.

Second, consider the function ##f(t) = t^2## as a mathematical object. You can draw its graph. This function is only zero for ##t = 0## and is greater than zero for ##t > 0##. This shouldn't be problematic.

Note that:
$$f(0) = 0, f'(0) = 0, f''(0) = 2$$So, although the derivative of ##f## at 0 is zero, the second derivative is not zero. You can extend this by considering ##f(t) = t^3, t^4 \dots##. In each case, more and more derivatives of the function are zero at ##t=0##, but eventually some nth derivative is not zero.

If ALL derivatives of a function were zero at ##0##, then the function would be identically zero. But, not if only the first derivative is zero.
Perok, I work in Non-standard analysis framework. See tag.
 
Mike_bb said:
Perok, I work in Non-standard analysis framework. See tag.
That's non-physical. Physics works on a real, not a hyperreal, continuum.
 
PeroK said:
That's non-physical. Physics works on a real, not a hyperreal, continuum.
Real line is incomplete because it doesn't include infinitesimals.
 
  • Skeptical
Likes weirdoguy and PeroK
Mike_bb said:
Real line is incomplete because it doesn't include infinitesimals.
The Real line is complete. That's the Archimedean principle.

If you want to study physics using hyperreals, then it's up to you to sort out the physical issues. Nature is under no obligation to obey your hyperreal axioms.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
593