What Experiment Did Emilie du Chatelet Perform to Explore Energy?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter physics_illiterate
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the historical exploration of energy by Emilie du Chatelet, specifically regarding her experiments and the equations associated with kinetic energy. Participants are attempting to clarify the relationship between different energy equations and the historical context of these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Historical, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks information on du Chatelet's original experiment to determine the correct equation for energy, questioning whether it is e=mv or e=mv^2.
  • Another participant asserts that kinetic energy is defined as 0.5(mv^2), indicating a potential misunderstanding of the equations in question.
  • A participant introduces the concept of "vis vitae," suggesting it may have been relevant during du Chatelet's time and relates it to the equation mv^(2).
  • There is a discussion about whether du Chatelet aimed to determine if momentum or "vis vitae" was the significant factor in her experiments.
  • Participants discuss the rivalry between Newton and Leibniz, noting how it may have influenced the development of mathematical concepts related to energy.
  • One participant reflects on the historical context of calculus development, mentioning Newton's reluctance to publish and the implications for British mathematics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correct formulation of energy equations and the historical significance of concepts like "vis vitae." There is no consensus on the specifics of du Chatelet's experiments or the implications of the rivalry between Newton and Leibniz.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various assumptions about historical figures and their contributions, as well as unresolved questions regarding the specific details of du Chatelet's experiments and the definitions of energy equations.

physics_illiterate
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
We are learning about Emilie in physics right now and we are trying to determine if the equation for energy is e=mv or e=mv^2. Obviously we know the answer but I need to prove it using a block of clay a metal ball and a measuring device such as a ruler. I know how to do the experiment but I want to know if anyone knows where I can find information on the original experiment done by Emilie. I have tried google and I get one result if that. Any ideas or suggestions would be great.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I thought kinetic energy was 0.5(mv^2)
 
Yian The Craft said:
I thought kinetic energy was 0.5(mv^2)

If I am not altogether wrong, the concept "vis vitae" (life force), preceded the concept of kinetic energy , and the
"vis vitae" concept was probably the one current at du Chatelet's time.
(I think it was originally crafted by Leibniz)
"vis vitae"=m*v^(2)
 
Is that not the equation for KE but without the 0.5 at the front?
 
I never said you were wrong!
Just wanted to note that du Chatelet probably wanted to find out whether it was
mv or mv^(2) which was the important quantity in the problem, i.e. whether momentum or "vis vitae" was the significant parameter in determining the fall length of the ball through the clay.
Sorry if you took offense; none was intended.
 
"Sorry if you took offense; none was intended."
Strange,I was about to write that same line.In any case,no offense taken.To return to the topic at hand,was Leibnitz not Newton's rival?I think he was,and they often made similar discoveries via different routes,but at about the same time...
 
Yes, unfortunately they became embittered rivals.
The origin is probably that Newton as a person was rather insecure and suspicious of nature.
There is no doubt that Newton developed calculus or "fluxion arithemetics" as he called it earlier than Leibniz.
However, Newton had the bad habit of "never" publishing, and only circulated his results among a few, select friends (Leibniz was not one of them!).
Hence, when Leibniz on the Continent developed and published his ideas on calculus, Newton immediately suspected him of plagiary,
which no one today thinks Leibniz did.
The net result of the quarrel was that British mathematics developed in isolation from Continental trends, to the detriment of the British..
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K