5

I'm solving a physics question, and i just encountered some question i had no idea how to start, i just got the right answer and inside it it has something in math i never thought possible,

I know that the integral of $a$ (acceleration) by $t$ (time) will give me $v$ (velocity), I also know that the integral of $v$ by $t$ will give me $r$ or $x$ (the movement vector). I know that the derivative of $x$ will give me $v$, and the derivative of $v$ will give me $a$.

I just saw these few lines:

photo notes

I somehow understand that you can replace $a$ with dv/dt because it's basically the same, but i have no idea how you can multiply the dt in the left sector of the equation, what does it mean?

I always thought that dx is basically saying 'Derivative by x' i never thought it's something "real" you can actually multiply and use basic math with...

Hope you could give me some idea about it, thanks!

In other answer i found this as the answer to "What does $dx$ mean?":

$dx$ does not mean anything. It's just a syntactical device to tell you the variable to differentiate with respect to or the integration variable.

This is exactly why i'm asking, because how can you multiply $dx$ in another thing if it's only a syntactical device?

mvw
  • 34,562
argamanza
  • 175
  • For the answer that you quote, look at the top comment on it. I tend to agree with that comment. It is a very un-illuminating way to look at it. The point being, it's more than just a syntactical device. – Paddling Ghost Jun 08 '15 at 16:51
  • See here: http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1252405/is-it-mathematically-valid-to-separate-variables-in-a-differential-equation – Hans Lundmark Jun 08 '15 at 18:00
  • And also here: http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/27425/what-am-i-doing-when-i-separate-the-variables-of-a-differential-equation – Hans Lundmark Jun 08 '15 at 18:01

3 Answers3

6

$dx$ is called a differential. The notation is due to Leibniz and while the original meaning might have changed from being an infinitesimal quantity to a modern style differential, one still keeps the notation just because it allows to do some basic math on the differentials (like you wrote) and get reasonable results. Like the chain rule $$ \frac{df}{dx} = \frac{df}{du} \frac{du}{dx} $$ which you could write as $$ df = \frac{df}{du} \, du $$ and use it e.g. for solving an integral with substituion of variables $u = x^2$, $du = 2 x \, du$: $$ \int\limits_a^b x^2 dx = \int\limits_{a^2}^{b^2} u \frac{du}{2\sqrt{u}} = \frac{1}{2} \int\limits_{a^2}^{b^2} \sqrt{u} \, du $$ Or the total differential $$ df = \frac{\partial f}{\partial x} dx + \frac{\partial f}{\partial y} dy + \frac{\partial f}{\partial z} dz $$ Or the arc length of a curve in the $x$-$y$-plane: \begin{align} ds^2 &= dx^2 + dy^2 \Rightarrow \\ L &= \int\limits_1^2 ds \\ &= \int\limits_{x_1}^{x_2} \frac{ds}{dx} \, dx \\ &= \int\limits_{x_1}^{x_2} \frac{\sqrt{dx^2 + dy^2}}{dx} \, dx \\ &= \int\limits_{x_1}^{x_2} \sqrt{1 + \left(\frac{dy}{dx}\right)^2} \, dx \\ \end{align} In that sense the differentials and the rules used to manipulate differentials form a "Kalkül", a way to compute results. (I have only a German reference for this: link).

mvw
  • 34,562
  • It can't be overemphasized that it's notation and just notation! It works nicely, yes, but it's notation! – hjhjhj57 Jun 08 '15 at 17:50
  • Do you have an example of a good failure? I am trying to remember one, but so far I could not. – mvw Jun 08 '15 at 17:59
  • You can see the problem in the two most voted answers: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/73492/how-misleading-is-it-to-regard-fracdydx-as-a-fraction

    As you mention it appears there's no problem when dealing with real functions in $\mathbb R$, and the problem only arises in higher dimensions. I can't do nothing but refer the interested reader to: http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/21199/is-frac-textrmdy-textrmdx-not-a-ratio

    – hjhjhj57 Jun 08 '15 at 18:16
  • @hjhjhj57 Actually, I think it can be overemphasized that it's "just notation". Sure, you may have an intuitive understanding of the meaning of differentiation and integration, but most students (including the asker of the question) do not. Differentials may not have any formal meaning, but they are not "just notation". They have a rich intuitive interpretation that simply must be understood for a student to gain any lasting understanding of calculus. – Resigned June 2023 Jun 11 '16 at 05:59
4

The technique being used here is called separation of variables. It can be done without separating differentials by using the chain rule. Specifically, you have (simplifying the notation a little bit)

$$\frac{dv}{dt} = \frac{mg - cv}{m}.$$

By dividing both sides by the expression on the right, you get

$$\frac{dv}{dt} \frac{m}{mg-cv} = 1.$$

Now integrate both sides where the time variable goes from $0$ to $t$:

$$\int_0^t \frac{dv}{ds} \frac{m}{mg-cv} ds = \int_0^t ds.$$

The annoying thing about doing it this way is that we have to introduce a new variable $s$ to use as the integration variable. But having done that, now you just need to integrate the left side by substitution, which can be justified by the chain rule and the fundamental theorem of calculus.

When you write this out with separation of differentials, you are essentially writing the syntactic result that happens after you change variables on the left side, and then taking the integration symbol away. That is, you get

$$\int_{v(0)}^{v(t)} \frac{m}{mg-cu} du = \int_0^t ds$$

which can be written in abbreviated form as

$$\frac{m dv}{mg-cv} = dt.$$

Ian
  • 101,645
3

The issue is that the physics equations often use a finite difference approximation to a derivative: $$x'=\frac{dx}{dt}\approx\frac{\Delta x}{\Delta t}$$ Whenever $x$ is linear over the region of interest, that approximation is correct. In general, if the time-step ($\Delta t$) is small enough, then the linearity approximation does hold. In fact, this is the basis of how computers integrate differential equations. They approximate the next value of the function: $$x'(t)+g(t,x)*x(t)=h(t,x)$$ By doing this: $$x'(t)\approx \frac{\Delta x}{\Delta t} \approx h(t,x)-g(t,x)*x(t)$$ Step forward by providing a value for $\Delta t$: $$x_{new}(t)\approx x(t)+\Delta x=x(t)+(h(t,x)-g(t,x)*x)*\Delta t$$

  • I still don't understand how you can multiply something like dt in another thing if it's not really anything but syntactical device... – argamanza Jun 08 '15 at 16:40
  • 1
    Differentials give you the slope of the curve, integrals give you the area. You can't have either of these without an interval, same as you can't have a speed without some elapsed time. The shorter the interval, the closer the approximation to reality. Actually you can have an instantaneous speed but to do so you have to totally rearrange the model so that speed isn't defined in terms of time. QV "momentum". – Peter Wone Jun 09 '15 at 00:34