General form of Newton II -- Not understanding this step in the derivation

In summary: If ##\Delta y\rightarrow 0## then ##\Delta x## can go to 0 or it can go to some other value. (In the example above ##\Delta x## actually goes to 2.)-DanIn summary, we cannot take the limit as Δy approaches zero in order to derive equation 9.9 from 9.8 because, while Δy going to zero may result in Δx going to zero, it could also result in Δx approaching some other value. Therefore, the limit must be taken as Δx approaches zero in order to accurately determine the derivative.
  • #1
member 731016
Homework Statement
Please see below
Relevant Equations
Please see below
For this,
1684126577290.png

Does someone please know how do we derive equation 9.9 from 9.8? Do we take the limits as t approach's zero for both sides? Why not take limit as momentum goes to zero?

Many thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
ChiralSuperfields said:
Homework Statement: Please see below
Relevant Equations: Please see below

For this,
View attachment 326570
Does someone please know how do we derive equation 9.9 from 9.8? Do we take the limits as t approach's zero for both sides? Why not take limit as momentum goes to zero?

Many thanks!
Are you going from 9.9 to 9.8 or from 9.8 to 9.9?

9.8 to 9.9:
When you define
##y^{\prime}(x) \approx \dfrac{ \Delta y}{ \Delta x}##

which variable do we take the limit of as we pass to the exact definition?

9.9 to 9.8:
This is a definition of one way to approximate the derivative.

-Dan
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
  • #3
ChiralSuperfields said:
Homework Statement: Please see below
Relevant Equations: Please see below

Does someone please know how do we derive equation 9.9 from 9.8? Do we take the limits as t approach's zero for both sides? Why not take limit as momentum goes to zero?
It is standard differential calculus. If the momentum function is differentiable then, necessarily, as ##dt\rightarrow 0## ##d\vec p\rightarrow 0##. The converse is not necessarily true.
Since ##dt\geq 0##, the limit is taken from above.
 
  • Like
Likes topsquark and member 731016
  • #4
haruspex said:
Since ##dt\geq 0##, the limit is taken from above.
For a derivative to exist, the two sided limit must exist. The limit is taken from both sides. ##dt## may be negative.

There is often a prejudice toward the future. Predictions for past behavior are less useful. We want to know what will happen next. But it is just a prejudice, not something inherent in the definitions.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016, DaveE and nasu
  • #5
topsquark said:
Are you going from 9.9 to 9.8 or from 9.8 to 9.9?

9.8 to 9.9:
When you define
##y^{\prime}(x) \approx \dfrac{ \Delta y}{ \Delta x}##

which variable do we take the limit of as we pass to the exact definition?

9.9 to 9.8:
This is a definition of one way to approximate the derivative.

-Dan
Thank you for your replies @topsquark, @haruspex and @jbriggs444 !

@topsquark You are correct, I was curious in going from equation 9.8 to 9.9.

According to calculus textbooks we take the limit as ##\Delta x## approach's zero. However, why can't we take the limit as ##\Delta y## approach's zero because as ##\Delta y## goes to zero so dose ##\Delta x## correct?

Many thanks!
 
  • #6
ChiralSuperfields said:
why can't we take the limit as ##\Delta y## approach's zero because as ##\Delta y## goes to zero so dose ##\Delta x## correct?
No. As I wrote:
haruspex said:
The converse is not necessarily true.
Consider a quartic with local minima at ##x=\pm 1, y=1##. If we start with ##(x,y)=(-1,1), \Delta x=2.1,\Delta y=0.1##, say, then as ##\Delta y\rightarrow 0##, ##\Delta x\rightarrow 2##.
The key point is that ##y=f(x)## does not necessarily have a unique inverse function ##x=f^{-1}(y)##.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016, topsquark and hutchphd

FAQ: General form of Newton II -- Not understanding this step in the derivation

What is the general form of Newton's Second Law?

The general form of Newton's Second Law is expressed as \( \mathbf{F} = \frac{d\mathbf{p}}{dt} \), where \( \mathbf{F} \) is the net force acting on an object, and \( \mathbf{p} \) is the momentum of the object. For a constant mass system, this simplifies to \( \mathbf{F} = m\mathbf{a} \), where \( m \) is the mass and \( \mathbf{a} \) is the acceleration.

Why is momentum used in the general form of Newton's Second Law?

Momentum is used in the general form because it accounts for both mass and velocity, making it applicable to systems where mass is not constant. This form, \( \mathbf{F} = \frac{d\mathbf{p}}{dt} \), provides a more comprehensive description of motion, including cases like variable mass systems (e.g., rockets losing fuel).

How does the general form of Newton's Second Law apply to variable mass systems?

For variable mass systems, the general form \( \mathbf{F} = \frac{d\mathbf{p}}{dt} \) is crucial because it considers changes in mass over time. In such cases, the force is not only responsible for changing the velocity (acceleration) but also for accounting for the mass loss or gain, which affects the momentum.

What are the steps in deriving the general form of Newton's Second Law?

The derivation starts with the definition of momentum \( \mathbf{p} = m\mathbf{v} \). Taking the time derivative, we get \( \frac{d\mathbf{p}}{dt} = \frac{d(m\mathbf{v})}{dt} \). For constant mass, this simplifies to \( m\frac{d\mathbf{v}}{dt} = m\mathbf{a} \), leading to \( \mathbf{F} = m\mathbf{a} \). For variable mass, the product rule is applied: \( \frac{d(m\mathbf{v})}{dt} = m\frac{d\mathbf{v}}{dt} + \mathbf{v}\frac{dm}{dt} \), which encompasses both the change in velocity and mass.

What common mistakes do people make when understanding this derivation?

A common mistake is assuming that the mass is always constant, thereby missing the importance of the term \( \mathbf{v}\frac{dm}{dt} \) in variable mass systems. Another is confusing the vector nature of the quantities involved, leading to incorrect applications of the product rule. Understanding that

Similar threads

Back
Top