1. H. T. & E. hte
    Joined
    21 May '04
    Moves
    3510
    08 Jul '06 08:231 edit
    Originally posted by PBE6
    Alan Curry --> http://mathproblems.info/group2.html (see problem #30)
    Allan Curry's solution and Tristan Simbulan's solutions are rather lengthy. Second order derivatives are involved indeed.

    However they give the same result.. as given by Irodov's method.

    Surprisingly I.E.Irodov's solution is deceptively simple, elegant and short. It gives the answer in 3 lines without having to do any integration...No differential equation.. no second order derivatives....Only physics ... And lo .... The result appears almost magically from the air...
  2. Joined
    19 Jun '04
    Moves
    2930
    08 Jul '06 18:181 edit
    Originally posted by ranjan sinha
    Allan Curry's solution and Tristan Simbulan's solutions are rather lengthy. Second order derivatives are involved indeed.

    However they give the same result.. as given by Irodov's method.

    Surprisingly I.E.Irodov's solution is deceptively simple, elegant and short. It gives the answer in 3 lines without hav ...[text shortened]... Only physics ... And lo .... The result appears almost magically from the air...
    Why don't you talk about your own method?
  3. Joined
    11 Jun '06
    Moves
    3516
    08 Jul '06 20:00
    Originally posted by ranjan sinha
    Allan Curry's solution and Tristan Simbulan's solutions are rather lengthy. Second order derivatives are involved indeed.

    However they give the same result.. as given by Irodov's method.

    Surprisingly I.E.Irodov's solution is deceptively simple, elegant and short. It gives the answer in 3 lines without hav ...[text shortened]... Only physics ... And lo .... The result appears almost magically from the air...
    if its only three lines could someone reproduce them here so us non-physicist types could see too. thanks
  4. Standard memberAThousandYoung
    Shoot the Squatters?
    tinyurl.com/43m7k8bw
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    26660
    08 Jul '06 20:18
    Originally posted by aginis
    if its only three lines could someone reproduce them here so us non-physicist types could see too. thanks
    I want to see the three lions too! Are they chasing the cat?
  5. H. T. & E. hte
    Joined
    21 May '04
    Moves
    3510
    09 Jul '06 05:331 edit
    Originally posted by aginis
    if its only three lines could someone reproduce them here so us non-physicist types could see too. thanks
    Here they are;...Let T be the time required.
    Both the cat & the mouse cover the same distanxe X during this time interval along the x-axis assumed to be along east direction. Then

    Integral from 0 to T of [V cos a dt]= U*T =X.........Eqn(1)

    Where a is the instantaneous angle that cat's velocity makes with X-axis. Obviously a is dependent on the time variable t.


    Speed of approach of the cat towards the mouse is V - U cos a. In time T a distance D is covered with this velocity of approach. Hence...

    Integral from 0 to T of [(V - U cos a)dt] = D ..........Eqn(2)
    From Eqn(1) & (2) we have..
    V*T - (U/V)*U T = D ...................................Eqn(3)

    This gives at once T = D*V/(V^2 - U^2)
    Isn't that cool...No differential equations.. no actual integration..
    Only physics and logic.
  6. Joined
    31 Oct '04
    Moves
    2047
    09 Jul '06 14:37
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    I want to see the three lions too! Are they chasing the cat?
    The 3 claimants for the lions-contest are Allen Curry, Tristan Simbulan and Ranjan Sinha
    They are still chasing the cat .
  7. Joined
    31 Oct '04
    Moves
    2047
    09 Jul '06 14:38
    Originally posted by ranjan sinha
    Here they are;...Let T be the time required.
    Both the cat & the mouse cover the same distanxe X during this time interval along the x-axis assumed to be along east direction. Then

    Integral from 0 to T of [V cos a dt]= U*T =X.........Eqn(1)

    Where a is the instantaneous angle that cat's velocity makes with X-axis. Obviously a is depend ...[text shortened]... that cool...No differential equations.. no actual integration..
    Only physics and logic.
    YES it works.
  8. H. T. & E. hte
    Joined
    21 May '04
    Moves
    3510
    16 Jul '06 15:23
    Originally posted by howzzat
    I looked up Irodov.
    Irodov seems to be wrong. Irodov has taken the instantaneous velocity of approach ( he has used 'convergence'😉 to be

    ( V - U cos a ),
    where 'a ' is the instantaneous angle between the directions of motion of the cat and the mouse.
    But the the instantaneous velocity of approach must be ...[text shortened]... v seems to be wrong.
    Either Irodov must be wrong or we have a contradiction.
    The concept of instantaneous relative velocity should also work. The expression of the relative velocity given by you presupposes that the angle between the velocities of the two moving bodies is not changing...

    Here that is not the case. The angle is not constant.. It is changing from moment to moment.

    Yet I too feel that the expression of instantaneous relative velocity viz. Sqrt[U^2 - 2 U V cos a + V^2] should also give correct result.

    Well I have not been able to really resolve the discrepancy pointed out by you. Maybe some Math-wizards like Acolyte would be able to plug the loop-hole correctly.
  9. top of the world
    Joined
    04 Jul '04
    Moves
    3603
    19 Jul '06 16:42
    Originally posted by ranjan sinha
    The concept of instantaneous relative velocity should also work. The expression of the relative velocity given by you presupposes that the angle between the velocities of the two moving bodies is not changing...

    Here that is not the case. The angle is not constant.. It is changing from moment to momen ...[text shortened]... Maybe some Math-wizards like Acolyte would be able to plug the loop-hole correctly.
    The cat doesn't know calculus, but it will cath up sure...
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree