Why is Acceleration Non-Zero at Maximum Height?

AI Thread Summary
Acceleration remains non-zero at maximum height because it is influenced by gravitational force, which is constant at -9.8 m/s², regardless of the object's velocity. When an object is thrown upwards, its velocity reaches zero at the peak, but the acceleration due to gravity continues to act on it, pulling it back down. The confusion arises from misunderstanding that the derivative of velocity (acceleration) does not depend solely on the instantaneous velocity but rather on the forces acting on the object. The discussion highlights the importance of differentiating velocity as a function of time to understand the behavior of the object throughout its motion. Thus, acceleration is always present, even when velocity is zero at the maximum height.
nebbione
Messages
131
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone! If i know that acceleration is the derivative of the velocity, why when i throw an object in the air when the object reaches the maximum height its velocity is 0 m/s and its acceleration is still -9.8 m/s^2 ? I mean, the derivative of 0 m/s is not -g but still 0.

Who can explain me this ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is the derivative of y = 4x - 4? What is the derivative of that when x = 1?
 
the derivative is 4 and when x=1 is still 4.
 
Do you see your mistake now?
 
Velocity in this case(magnitude) is not constant.Therefore you have to differentiate velocity as a function of time this and find its value at the required time.However,since velocity increases uniformly and I've is linear,its derivative will be constant
 
Vanadium 50 -

Clever - interesting how you explained what he did wrong
without explicitly stating what he did wrong. That is a good
strategy to employ when teaching others. Thank You.
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
Back
Top