Skip to main content
replaced http://physics.stackexchange.com/ with https://physics.stackexchange.com/
Source Link

There is a precise definition of power in the following question: Why isn't the product rule used in the definition of mechanical work?Why isn't the product rule used in the definition of mechanical work?. Here is a reproduction of that text:

For a particle traveling along a parameterized curve $\vec x(t)$ and under the influence of a force $\vec F(\vec x,t)$ which is explicitly dependent on both position in space and time, the work performed on the particle by this force from a time $t_0$ to a time $t$ is defined as follows: \begin{align} W_{t_0}(t) = \int_{t_0}^{t} \vec F(\vec x(t'),t')\cdot \dot{\vec x}(t') \,dt' \end{align} Note that the expression on the right is often written $\int \vec F\cdot \vec dx$, but this is really schematic, the the mathematically precise definition is what I have written above in terms of a parameterized path with an integral over some range of parameter values. The definition of instantaneous power is then \begin{align} P(t) = \dot W_{t_0}(t) \end{align} Taking the derivative of both sides with respect to $t$, and using the fundamental theorem of calculus, we obtain the desired expression for the power \begin{align} P(t) = \vec F(\vec x(t),t)\cdot \dot{\vec x}(t) \end{align}

Notice that the expression $\vec F\cdot \vec v$ is the instantaneous power for arbitrarily changing force and velocity. There is not even a restriction on the constancy of their product.

There is a precise definition of power in the following question: Why isn't the product rule used in the definition of mechanical work?. Here is a reproduction of that text:

For a particle traveling along a parameterized curve $\vec x(t)$ and under the influence of a force $\vec F(\vec x,t)$ which is explicitly dependent on both position in space and time, the work performed on the particle by this force from a time $t_0$ to a time $t$ is defined as follows: \begin{align} W_{t_0}(t) = \int_{t_0}^{t} \vec F(\vec x(t'),t')\cdot \dot{\vec x}(t') \,dt' \end{align} Note that the expression on the right is often written $\int \vec F\cdot \vec dx$, but this is really schematic, the the mathematically precise definition is what I have written above in terms of a parameterized path with an integral over some range of parameter values. The definition of instantaneous power is then \begin{align} P(t) = \dot W_{t_0}(t) \end{align} Taking the derivative of both sides with respect to $t$, and using the fundamental theorem of calculus, we obtain the desired expression for the power \begin{align} P(t) = \vec F(\vec x(t),t)\cdot \dot{\vec x}(t) \end{align}

Notice that the expression $\vec F\cdot \vec v$ is the instantaneous power for arbitrarily changing force and velocity. There is not even a restriction on the constancy of their product.

There is a precise definition of power in the following question: Why isn't the product rule used in the definition of mechanical work?. Here is a reproduction of that text:

For a particle traveling along a parameterized curve $\vec x(t)$ and under the influence of a force $\vec F(\vec x,t)$ which is explicitly dependent on both position in space and time, the work performed on the particle by this force from a time $t_0$ to a time $t$ is defined as follows: \begin{align} W_{t_0}(t) = \int_{t_0}^{t} \vec F(\vec x(t'),t')\cdot \dot{\vec x}(t') \,dt' \end{align} Note that the expression on the right is often written $\int \vec F\cdot \vec dx$, but this is really schematic, the the mathematically precise definition is what I have written above in terms of a parameterized path with an integral over some range of parameter values. The definition of instantaneous power is then \begin{align} P(t) = \dot W_{t_0}(t) \end{align} Taking the derivative of both sides with respect to $t$, and using the fundamental theorem of calculus, we obtain the desired expression for the power \begin{align} P(t) = \vec F(\vec x(t),t)\cdot \dot{\vec x}(t) \end{align}

Notice that the expression $\vec F\cdot \vec v$ is the instantaneous power for arbitrarily changing force and velocity. There is not even a restriction on the constancy of their product.

Source Link
joshphysics
  • 58.3k
  • 5
  • 144
  • 205

There is a precise definition of power in the following question: Why isn't the product rule used in the definition of mechanical work?. Here is a reproduction of that text:

For a particle traveling along a parameterized curve $\vec x(t)$ and under the influence of a force $\vec F(\vec x,t)$ which is explicitly dependent on both position in space and time, the work performed on the particle by this force from a time $t_0$ to a time $t$ is defined as follows: \begin{align} W_{t_0}(t) = \int_{t_0}^{t} \vec F(\vec x(t'),t')\cdot \dot{\vec x}(t') \,dt' \end{align} Note that the expression on the right is often written $\int \vec F\cdot \vec dx$, but this is really schematic, the the mathematically precise definition is what I have written above in terms of a parameterized path with an integral over some range of parameter values. The definition of instantaneous power is then \begin{align} P(t) = \dot W_{t_0}(t) \end{align} Taking the derivative of both sides with respect to $t$, and using the fundamental theorem of calculus, we obtain the desired expression for the power \begin{align} P(t) = \vec F(\vec x(t),t)\cdot \dot{\vec x}(t) \end{align}

Notice that the expression $\vec F\cdot \vec v$ is the instantaneous power for arbitrarily changing force and velocity. There is not even a restriction on the constancy of their product.