Why classics assumed that the force constant in two different references frames?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the assumptions regarding the constancy of force and acceleration in different reference frames, particularly in the context of classical mechanics before the advent of modern physics. Participants explore the implications of Newton's laws and the transformation equations for uniformly moving observers.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why acceleration is assumed constant in different frames when distance varies, referencing Newton's law of motion.
  • Another participant clarifies that the assumption holds true only for uniformly moving observers and provides transformation equations to support this.
  • A subsequent participant expresses confusion about the relationship between acceleration and position, questioning how acceleration can be constant if velocity depends on distance.
  • Another participant explains that acceleration does not necessarily depend on position and illustrates this with the concept of constant velocity, while also addressing the mathematical derivation of acceleration in different frames.
  • A final participant acknowledges understanding the mathematical aspect but struggles with the logical interpretation of the concepts discussed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion reflects a lack of consensus on the logical interpretation of the mathematical results regarding acceleration and force in different frames. While some participants provide mathematical clarity, others express confusion about the underlying logic.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence of certain variables on others, such as velocity on position, and the implications of transformation equations, but do not resolve the conceptual uncertainties surrounding these relationships.

najat
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
hi every one :)

i need a small help please ...
we have tow frames and tow observers , let suppose there is a force on an object in one of the frames , so from Newton law:
f=ma

"a" depend on "x" distance which is not constant in the other frame , so why they assumed that it is constant as the mass ?!
of course i am talking about the period before modern physics of Einstein and the electromagnetic theory.

thanks a lot ...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
it is true only for two uniformly moving observers.for them,
x'=x-vt
y'=y
z'=z
t'=t,where v is constant.double differentiation w.r.t. time shows the equality of forces.it is non relativistic version.
 
thanks andrien for the reply :)

one more quastion please:
"v" in that equations is the frame speed
what about the "a" for the body under the force ? this is what confuse me
a=dv/dt
v=x/t
so v depend on x ! ... how "a" can be constant?
 
a is the second derivative of x. This does not mean that a depends on x. (it may but it does not have to). Same way as the velocity does necessary depend on position even though it is v=dx/dt (and not v=x/t). There is such a thing as motion with constant velocity, isn't it?

Back to the original question, they don't assume it, it follows from the transformation equations (see andrien's post).
The acceleration in the moving frame is [tex]a^'=\frac{d^2x'}{dt^2}=\frac{d^2(x-vt)}{dt^2}=\frac{d^2x}{dt^2}=a[/tex]
This is so because when you take the second derivative in respect to time of the term vt the result is zero (the first derivative is v which is a constant).
 
thank u nasu ...i v got it mathematically ...but not logically :)
i know i have to train my brain to imagine it ...
have a nice day ^_^
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 114 ·
4
Replies
114
Views
7K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K