Why does the solution for t in the equation Vf=Vi+at result in a negative sign?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The equation Vf = Vi + at can be rearranged to solve for time (t) as t = (Vf - Vi) / a. In the specific case discussed, where the initial velocity (Vi) is zero, the equation simplifies to t = Vf / a. The confusion arises from a misinterpretation of the signs, particularly in gravity problems where velocity can be negative when falling. The source of the misunderstanding is clarified in the referenced document, which ultimately does not include a negative sign in the final answer.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic kinematics and motion equations
  • Familiarity with algebraic manipulation of equations
  • Knowledge of initial and final velocity concepts
  • Basic understanding of gravity's effect on motion
NEXT STEPS
  • Review kinematic equations in physics textbooks
  • Study the concept of initial and final velocities in motion
  • Learn about the role of acceleration in motion equations
  • Explore common misconceptions in physics related to signs in equations
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, educators teaching kinematics, and anyone seeking to clarify concepts related to motion equations and their applications.

vysero
Messages
134
Reaction score
0
Ok so here is my problem:

Vf=Vi+at

I want to solve for t so:

(Vf-Vi)/a = t

right so now my problem starts how can this happen:

t = -Vf/a ?

The solution above comes from this site http://www.monmsci.net/~fasano/phys1/Chapter_2_10.pdf

scroll down to problem 2.31 and you will find what I am looking at, in this situation Vi = 0 so they disregarded it and somehow during that process (at least i believe it was during that process) they came up with:

t = -Vf/a

Please explain to me how that works, where the heck did the - sign come from??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
looks like a typo to me. sometimes in gravity problems +v means its going up vs -v means its falling but that's not the case. notice in the actual answer the - is gone.
 
Oh well I didn't even see that lol well thank you it prob. was just a typo
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
20K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K