When simple motion begins is there acceleration and jerk

AI Thread Summary
In 2D motion problems, initial acceleration is often overlooked for simplicity, despite the need for it to transition from rest to constant velocity. When an object is at rest and then accelerates instantly, the acceleration can be considered infinite at that moment, represented mathematically by a Dirac delta function. This means that while the ball is being thrown, it experiences acceleration until it is released, after which it moves at constant velocity. The concept of impulse allows for the simplification of calculations, as the time taken for acceleration can be ignored, focusing instead on the momentum before and after the action. Thus, while initial acceleration exists, it is frequently disregarded in basic physics problems.
spikehoward
Ive been looking at the simple physics problems for 2D motion. For example, a ball starts from rest and is thrown at 5m/s at an angle of 30 degrees with respect to the ground on earth. Most of the problems assume that the acceleration in the x-direction is 0. Doesnt there need to be an initial acceleration to get from rest to a constant velocity? Can we just ignore that instant for calculations?

In general when motion starts, is there always an increase in acceleration, jerk, onto the umpteenth derivative?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
spikehoward said:
Doesnt there need to be an initial acceleration to get from rest to a constant velocity? Can we just ignore that instant for calculations?

Yes, the problems are ignoring any acceleration to keep things simple.

spikehoward said:
In general when motion starts, is there always an increase in acceleration, jerk, onto the umpteenth derivative?

That's right.
 
spikehoward said:
In general when motion starts, is there always an increase in acceleration, jerk, onto the umpteenth derivative?

If we have an object at rest until time ##t=t_0## and at that moment it instantly accelerates to velocity ##v##, it's said that the acceleration ##a(t_0 )## is infinite and ##a(t) = v\delta (t-t_0 )##. Here ##\delta (t)## is a Dirac delta distribution - something that's nonzero at only one point but still has a nonzero integral. In the sense how derivatives are calculated for distributions, it does have nonzero derivatives of arbitrarily high order.
 
When a ball is said to be launched with a constant velocity this can be unambiguously true physically . The acceleration of the ball takes place while it is still being held by the thrower . The instant it loses contact with the throwers hand the ball undergoes no further acceleration and therefore it is launched at a constant velocity .

The action is generally smooth and there is certainly no step change in the ball's velocity at any point in the throw .

There are many other examples of this type of action where a body is accelerated by a mechanism and then has constant velocity after release .
 
  • Like
Likes pixel and CWatters
spikehoward said:
Doesnt there need to be an initial acceleration to get from rest to a constant velocity? Can we just ignore that instant for calculations?
This is the beauty of the concept of 'Impulse'. Impulse is change of Momentum and the time taken to achieve that change is not relevant. This means that there are many calculations (collisions are a good example) where the actual time of contact / acceleration can be ignored; all that matters are the before and after situations and we know that Momentum of the whole system is not changed (conserved).
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top