Energy Conservation and Escape Velocity

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of energy conservation, specifically in the context of escape velocity and the relationship between kinetic and potential energy as a particle moves away from a mass, such as a planet.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between kinetic energy and potential energy, questioning how energy is conserved when potential energy is negative and decreases as distance increases. Some participants attempt to clarify the implications of negative potential energy and its convention.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing insights and attempting to clarify their understanding of energy conservation. Some have begun to articulate their thoughts on the graphical representation of energy, while others seek further clarification on specific points, indicating a productive exchange of ideas.

Contextual Notes

There appears to be some confusion regarding the interpretation of negative potential energy and its implications for energy conservation. Participants are also grappling with the conventions used in physics to describe these energies.

Gilgalad
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
If a particle is launched with kinetic energy as it gets further from the mass (eg a planet) the kinetic energy decreases. However Potential Energy GMm/r also decreases the further you get from the mass. Where does all this energy go? :confused:

Granted, the calculation U + K = 0 does give an answer that I have seen all over the place for escape velocity but I always thought energy is conserved and we have initial kinetic and potential energy but no final energy. I was wondering if energy is a vector quantity and there is no resultant energy.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It is negative potential energy that decreases in the escape velocity example, whereas kinetic energy is always a non-negative quantity.
Hence, in the escape velocity example, potential energy increases up to zero level as kinetic energy decreases to zero level.
 
I unterstand that potential energy is negative but I thought that was just convention. The size of the number is decreasing as you move away from a planet. So is the energy still not getting less as you move away?
 
Gilgalad said:
I unterstand that potential energy is negative but I thought that was just convention. The size of the number is decreasing as you move away from a planet. So is the energy still not getting less as you move away?

Try thinking about it in terms of a debt. As the magnitude of your debt decreases, it is the same as gaining money.
 
I think I get it now. Newton only put it negatively inversely proportional to the radius (squared in force equation) because that is the rate it increases at. So if you plot -1/r (for symplicity) for PE as well as a 1/r for KE and translate PE up by an infinite amount so both graphs are in the top right quadrant except for when PE goes off to infinity down the y-axis the total of both energies at any certain radius is constant.

Also where the two graphs cross is that the the distance you need to get to to have enough KE to overcome the PE?
 
What do you mean by that KE is to overcome PE?
I'm not sure I understand..
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
55
Views
7K
Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K