Why is the s = vt - (1/2)at2 formula not included in exams?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the omission of the formula s = vt - (1/2)at² from exam materials in the context of equations of motion. Participants explore the implications of this omission and the specific conditions under which the formula can be applied.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants question why the formula s = vt - (1/2)at² is not included in exams, suggesting it may only apply in certain situations. There is exploration of the effects of negative acceleration on the formula and comparisons between different equations of motion.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants offering various interpretations of the equations and questioning the conditions under which they apply. Some guidance has been provided regarding the consistency of variable representation across different texts.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the equations are typically used under the assumption of constant acceleration, and there is mention of varying conventions in notation for initial and final velocities across different educational resources.

influx
Messages
162
Reaction score
1
In both my Maths and Physics exams they give these equations of motion:

v = u + at
v2 = u2 + 2as
s = ut + (1/2)at2
s = (u+v/2)t


However the following equation is never included (even though it can simplify some problems significantly)

s = vt - (1/2)at2

Why is this deliberately omitted by the exam boards? Is it because this formula can only be applied in certain situations ?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
influx said:
In both my Maths and Physics exams they give these equations of motion:

v = u + at
v2 = u2 + 2as
s = ut + (1/2)at2 \color{red}\Leftarrow
s = (u+v/2)t


However the following equation is never included (even though it can simplify some problems significantly)

s = vt - (1/2)at2

Why is this deliberately omitted by the exam boards? Is it because this formula can only be applied in certain situations ?

Thanks
What happens if the acceleration a is negative in your third equation? :wink:
 
from v=u+at, put u=v-at in third.what will you get
 
gneill said:
What happens if the acceleration a is negative in your third equation? :wink:

Oh then it becomes s = vt + 1/2(at2)? but this is still different to s = ut+1/2(at2) right? Because in the latter equation you would substitute a value for u, but if you do not have u given, then you would use the other one where you substitute a value for v?
 
It just abbreviation. Different books different abbreviation for initial and final velocity

vi, vf
v0,v1
u, v

Once you adopt u=initial and v=final, be consistent.
 
influx said:
Oh then it becomes s = vt + 1/2(at2)? but this is still different to s = ut+1/2(at2) right? Because in the latter equation you would substitute a value for u, but if you do not have u given, then you would use the other one where you substitute a value for v?
No, the acceleration is not squared. Only the time is squared. What happens to the sign of the whole term?
 
gneill said:
No, the acceleration is not squared. Only the time is squared. What happens to the sign of the whole term?

Oh sorry, I meant to say :

If a is negative, the third equation becomes s = ut - (1/2)at2

but s = ut - (1/2)at2 is not the same as s = vt - (1/2)at2 is it? Because the latter requires you to substitute a value for 'v' (final velocity), whilst the first one require you to substitute a value for 'u' (initial velocity)..
 
The negative is included when acceleration is negative like gravity which will adjust itself to get positive time since if ur going from high elevation to low elevation you will get positive time when you solve for it. Remember those equations are only used when acceleration is constant not changing.
 
Your velocity multiplied by "t" is always the initial velocity no matter which letter is used (u or v). Different books (and often different chapters in the same book) use different symbols.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
8K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K