On Tue, 01 Apr 2014 17:55:32 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Then your computation is incorrect and will systematically >> underestimate the stopping distance. Assuming for simplicity that the >> acceleration actually increases linearly until it reaches maximum,
We're talking deceleration, so it actually decreases linearly until it reaches minimum :-) >> picture the velocity graph between, say, t=0 and t=1s. You are >> modeling it as a straight line segment. However, it would actually be >> part of a quadratic curve connecting the same points, convex upwards. Concave upwards, since we're decelerating. >> The line segment is short-cutting the curve between the two points. The >> distance traveled is the integral of the curve, and it is easy to see >> that the integral of the line segment is less than the integral of the >> actual curve. Integral of the line segment is greater than the integral of the actual curve. > .... great. > > Okay. I never studied calculus, so this is beyond my expertise. Is this > going to make a majorly significant difference to the end result? I thought that there was a chance that there might be, but it turns out, not so much. There is a difference, but for the purposes of the simulation it probably doesn't matter. If you were trying to land a spacecraft on Mars, that's a different story... -- Steven -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
