Why does substitution F = ma in this problem not work?

In summary, the conversation discusses the use of a gravitational force equation on Planet X and how to determine the final velocity of a particle. The individual tries to solve the problem using integration but realizes that the correct approach is to use conservation of energy. The conversation also includes a trick using separation of variables to solve the problem.
  • #1
Nano-Passion
1,291
0
We have a gravitational force on Planet X [tex]F=mγy^2[/tex] and we want to know the particle's final velocity. I know how to get the right answer, but I am wondering how come this doesn't work.

[tex]F = mγy^2[/tex]
[tex]ma = mγy^2[/tex]
[tex]∫a dt= γ∫y^2 dt[/tex]
Integral from 0 to t, I take v_0 = 0 y_0=0
[tex] v = γy^3/3[/tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You don't say what y is, but shouldn't a gravitational force be inversely proportional to some distance squared, not directly proportional?
 
  • #3
AlephZero said:
You don't say what y is, but shouldn't a gravitational force be inversely proportional to some distance squared, not directly proportional?

Yes it should. But that isn't the case here. I'll quote the book:

"Near to the point where I am standing on the surface of Planet X, the graviational force on a mass m is a vertically down but has magnitude mγy^2, where γ is a constant and y is the mass's height above the horizontal ground...although most unusual [the gravitational force] is still conservative."
 
  • #4
You're integrating the position over the time variable. Your integral looks like

[itex]\int y(t)^2 dt[/itex]

in reality and you don't know what the functional dependence of y(t) is. What you did was basically:

[itex]\int y^2 dy[/itex]

which is very different from the first integral.
 
  • #5
Pengwuino said:
You're integrating the position over the time variable. Your integral looks like

[itex]\int y(t)^2 dt[/itex]

in reality and you don't know what the functional dependence of y(t) is. What you did was basically:

[itex]\int y^2 dy[/itex]

which is very different from the first integral.

Oh, thanks! Your right, I have absolutely no idea how y changes as a function of time, it all makes sense now.
 
  • #6
Here's a trick if [itex]a = \ddot{y}[/itex]:
[tex]
\begin{align*}
m\ddot{y} &= m\gamma{}y^2 \\
\ddot{y} &= \gamma{}y^2 \\
\frac{\mathrm{d}\dot{y}}{\mathrm{d}t} &= \gamma{}y^2 \\
\frac{\mathrm{d}\dot{y}}{\mathrm{d}y}\frac{\mathrm{d}y}{\mathrm{d}t} &= \gamma{}y^2 \\
\frac{\mathrm{d}\dot{y}}{\mathrm{d}y}\dot{y} &= \gamma{}y^2 \\
\int_{\dot{y}_0}^{\dot{y}}\dot{y}\mathrm{d}\dot{y} &= \int_{y_0}^y\gamma{}y^2\mathrm{d}y \\
\frac{\dot{y}^2 - \dot{y}_0^2}{2} &= \gamma{}\frac{y^3 - y_0^3}{3} \\
\dot{y} &= \sqrt{\dot{y}_0^2 + \frac{2\gamma}{3}\left(y^3-y_0^3\right)}
\end{align*}
[/tex]
 
  • #7
jhae2.718 said:
Here's a trick if [itex]a = \ddot{y}[/itex]:
[tex]
\begin{align*}
m\ddot{y} &= m\gamma{}y^2 \\
\ddot{y} &= \gamma{}y^2 \\
\frac{\mathrm{d}\dot{y}}{\mathrm{d}t} &= \gamma{}y^2 \\
\frac{\mathrm{d}\dot{y}}{\mathrm{d}y}\frac{\mathrm{d}y}{\mathrm{d}t} &= \gamma{}y^2 \\
\frac{\mathrm{d}\dot{y}}{\mathrm{d}y}\dot{y} &= \gamma{}y^2 \\
\int_{\dot{y}_0}^{\dot{y}}\dot{y}\mathrm{d}\dot{y} &= \int_{y_0}^y\gamma{}y^2\mathrm{d}y \\
\frac{\dot{y}^2 - \dot{y}_0^2}{2} &= \gamma{}\frac{y^3 - y_0^3}{3} \\
\dot{y} &= \sqrt{\dot{y}_0^2 + \frac{2\gamma}{3}\left(y^3-y_0^3\right)}
\end{align*}
[/tex]

I like that trick! I recall a professor of mine showed it to me last year when I was trying to solve a problem. I know it is separation of variables and playing around with the math, but does this trick have a specific name?
 
  • #8
The left part is basically the kinetic energy (and its time-derivative before the integration), so it is related to energy conservation.

##F=m\gamma y^2## gives a potential of
##V(y)=\frac{m\gamma}{3} y^3##

The total kinetic energy ##\frac{m}{2}\dot{y}^2 + V(y)## is conserved, write it down, and you get the same result without integration.
 
  • #9
mfb said:
The left part is basically the kinetic energy (and its time-derivative before the integration), so it is related to energy conservation.

##F=m\gamma y^2## gives a potential of
##V(y)=\frac{m\gamma}{3} y^3##

The total kinetic energy ##\frac{m}{2}\dot{y}^2 + V(y)## is conserved, write it down, and you get the same result without integration.

Thanks, that is how the textbook tells you to solve it as well, that is to use conservation of energy. But I just wanted to try something different and was wondering why it didn't work.

I didn't realize that you can use ## for latex, thanks a lot!
 

1. Why is the equation F = ma not applicable in this problem?

The equation F = ma, which stands for force equals mass times acceleration, is a fundamental equation in classical mechanics. It is used to calculate the net force acting on an object based on its mass and acceleration. However, there are certain situations where this equation may not be applicable, such as in cases where other forces, like friction or air resistance, are present.

2. What are the limitations of using F = ma in problem-solving?

While F = ma is a useful equation in many cases, it does have its limitations. One of the main limitations is that it only applies to objects moving in a straight line with constant acceleration. In real-world scenarios, objects often have complex motion patterns and are subject to various forces, making it difficult to use F = ma to accurately predict their behavior.

3. Can other equations be used instead of F = ma to solve this problem?

Yes, there are other equations in physics that can be used to solve problems involving forces and motion. For example, if the problem involves circular motion, the equation F = ma would not be applicable, and instead, the equation for centripetal force, F = mv^2/r, would be used. It is important to choose the appropriate equation based on the specific problem at hand.

4. What are some common mistakes people make when using F = ma?

One common mistake people make when using F = ma is assuming that the acceleration of an object is always equal to the net force acting on it divided by its mass. This equation only holds true in cases where there are no other forces acting on the object. Another mistake is using the equation in situations where it is not applicable, as mentioned in the answer to the first question.

5. How can I determine if F = ma is valid for a particular problem?

To determine if F = ma is a valid equation to use in a problem, you need to carefully analyze the situation and consider all the forces acting on the object. If there are no other forces present besides the ones causing acceleration, then F = ma can be used. However, if there are other forces involved, a different equation or approach may be necessary to solve the problem accurately.

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
738
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
25
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
234
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
796
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
216
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
320
Back
Top