Why Does the Acceleration Formula Work?

  • Thread starter Thread starter staetualex
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Acceleration
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the acceleration formula and its components, emphasizing the importance of grasping the underlying math rather than just memorizing equations. Acceleration is defined as the rate of change of velocity, which is itself the rate of change of position, leading to the formulation a = d²x/dt². Participants highlight that a solid understanding of these concepts allows for easier derivation of related equations, reducing reliance on rote memorization. The conversation also touches on the value of translating mathematical expressions into more intuitive language for better comprehension. Overall, a deeper grasp of the principles behind the formulas enhances learning and application in physics.
staetualex
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hy folks! I am new in here.Anyone can give a basic intuition about why the acceleration formula actually works? I mean, my brain is not capable to "nerd-ize" formulas, i either forgot them , i either on a test write the coulomb formula something like (q1 q2 r^2)/2pi eps0. I am shure if i remember now the (d^2 x)/(dt^2) in a couple of months it will be something like dx^2/dv or whatsoever . Is anyone who can describe this formula, how it holds in a real example, some associations with other processes, etc. what every number/letter in that formula represent? I mean change in time square, what :confused:? thanks and have a good day!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's a matter of learning to translate from math to English (and back).

x is position, t is time.

v={{dx}\over{dt}} or "velocity is the rate of change of the position"

a={{dv}\over{dt}} or "acceleration is the rate of change of the velocity"

Now that we're done defining terms, let's look at what that means:

Since v is the first derivative of x, and a is the first derivative of v, then a can be written as a second derivative of x.
Since both first derivatives are taken with respect to t,

a={{dv}\over{dt}}={{d^{2}x}\over{dt^{2}}}

I don't think I can stress enough just how much it helps to understand the math--I took a course once where I had to memorize 37 equations for the first test alone. Needless to say, it didn't go well. But on a second attempt at the course, with a better understanding of the math involved, I only had to memorize four or five equations and could derive all of the others in about a minute total.
 
Last edited:
hi, staetualex, take a little time on chain rules.
It's not dx^2/dv; it's vdv/dx.
 
staetualex said:
my brain is not capable to "nerd-ize" formulas

I can't help you, but I thank you for adding a cool new word to my vocabulary. :smile:
 
First, look at the simplest possible case (constant acceleration).

If a is constant, then the solution for velocity looks like v=at+k.

When t=0, we know that at=0. This is pretty obvious so far, but it does tell us that k is the velocity at that time. Since it's the initial velocity of the object, I'll change the name of that variable to something that let's me remember what it represents.

v=at+v_{i}

Now if we go back to the definition of velocity, we have {{dx}\over{dt}}=at+v_{i}. We integrate again to solve for position, and get the following:

x={{{at^{2}}\over{2}}+v_{i}t+k

Again we note the first two terms are zero, when t=0, so this time k must be equal to the initial position. So once again, we rename that variable to something easier to remember.

x={{{at^{2}}\over{2}}+v_{i}t+x_{i}
 
Last edited:
kyiydnlm said:
hi, staetualex, take a little time on chain rules.
It's not dx^2/dv; it's vdv/dx.

well, i know, i was just predicting my future, in case i mechanically learn the formulas, not knowing the principle it works. I may forgot them, or scramble the terms involved. Others who gave a reply on post, thank you, you helped me to understand better the schrodinger equation proof.

Phase shifter, you are great, now I'm not dependent of the formula anymore, i can derive it by myself.

to danger, i am glad i can help , sometimes i can invent new words .
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top