Take the 2-minute tour ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In my physics book "University Physics", there is a chapter on relating linear and angular kinematics.

I understand the parts where it shows $v = r\omega$ and $a_{\text{tan}} = r\alpha$.

However in the part where they show $a_{\text{rad}} = r\omega^2$, they use the formula $a_{\text{rad}} = \frac{v^2}{r}$ which had previously been shown for when $v$ is constant. It mentions that it is also true when $v$ is not constant, but does not provide proof.

Is this hard to prove, or is it something I should easily be able to see? Can anyone help make it clear?

Thanks!

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer 1

up vote 1 down vote accepted

You can prove it with a little trick. For a particle on a circle of radius $r$ we have $\vec{x}(t)\cdot\vec{x}(t)=r^2$ at each point in time. Differentiating with respect to time we get $\vec{x}\cdot\vec{v}=0$. Differentiating again we get $v^2+\vec{x}\cdot\vec{a}=0$. But $\vec{x}\cdot\vec{a} = - r a_{\mathrm{rad}}$, and the relation $a_{\mathrm{rad}} = v^2/r$ follows.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks! That was very helpful. –  Danikar Aug 7 '12 at 22:07
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.