Why do we feel tired when holding something without any movement?

  • Thread starter Vicol
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses how we can feel physical tiredness when holding something in our hands, despite there being no displacement or mechanical work being done. It is explained that maintaining muscle tension requires energy and that our muscles do not work like springs.
  • #1
Vicol
14
0
Hello everyone :)

Could someone explain me how is it possible that we "lose energy" when we hold something in our hands though there is no shift/displacement? We feel it physically - tiredness.

I can generalize this question - to keep something at certain height we have to use force. But work is scalar product of force and shift, so in this case it seems to be zero. Do we need energy to "generate" force which keeps something in fixed possition?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Yes. Same as pushing against a sturdy wall. Maintaining muscle tension requires metabolism to use up calories but doesn't yield more potential energy so physically you don't do work.
 
  • #3
Vicol said:
But work is scalar product of force and shift, so in this case it seems to be zero.
The mechanical work done on the object is zero, as there is no displacement.

Vicol said:
Do we need energy to "generate" force which keeps something in fixed possition?
Yes we do, as we are biological systems. It requires chemical energy ("food") for us to keep our muscles under tension.

Of course, you could just place the object on a shelf. :wink:
 
  • #4
Our muslces work like spring, don't they? I thought we lose energy only to squeeze spring, not to mantain it squeezed :)
 
  • #5
Vicol said:
Our muslces work like spring, don't they?
Not really. Your muscle fibers continually contract and relax to maintain tension. That takes chemical energy.
 

1. What is a force-work-energy problem?

A force-work-energy problem is a type of physics problem that involves calculating the work and energy associated with a force acting on an object. It typically involves using equations and principles of mechanics to determine the force, displacement, and energy changes of an object.

2. How do you approach solving a force-work-energy problem?

The first step in solving a force-work-energy problem is to identify all the given information, including the force, displacement, and any other relevant data. Then, you can use equations such as W = Fd and PE = mgh to calculate the work and energy changes. It is important to use the correct units and pay attention to the direction of the force and displacement vectors.

3. What are some common misconceptions about force-work-energy problems?

One common misconception is that the work done by a force is always equal to the change in kinetic energy of an object. This is only true when there are no other forces acting on the object. Another misconception is that work and energy are the same thing. Work is a measure of the transfer of energy, but energy is a property of an object and can exist without any work being done.

4. Can force-work-energy problems be applied to real-world situations?

Yes, force-work-energy problems are used in many real-world situations, such as calculating the energy needed to push a car up a hill, or the work done by a person lifting weights at the gym. They can also be used in engineering and design to optimize the use of energy and minimize waste.

5. How can you check if your solution to a force-work-energy problem is correct?

One way to check your solution is to perform a unit analysis, making sure that all units are consistent throughout the calculations. You can also use the principle of conservation of energy, which states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transferred or transformed. If your solution violates this principle, then it is likely incorrect.

Similar threads

Replies
48
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
982
Replies
6
Views
56K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
880
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top