Gravitational Potential Energy and Work Energy Theorem

AI Thread Summary
When work is done on an object, its energy increases, but when gravity acts on a falling object, the potential energy decreases while kinetic energy increases. The work-energy theorem indicates that the work done by forces other than gravity is zero in this scenario, as gravity's effect is already accounted for in the potential energy term. Thus, the equation simplifies to zero net work equating to the change in potential energy and kinetic energy. Including gravitational work in the work-energy equation would result in double-counting, leading to incorrect conclusions. Understanding this distinction clarifies how energy transitions between potential and kinetic forms during free fall.
hqjb
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Just a little confused, when work is done on an object it's energy increases right? (i.e. Work done on object = Change P.E + Change K.E + Work done by object)

So how come when gravitational force does work on an object(i.e. it falls) the potential energy decreases instead.

So its like Work done by gravitational force = Decrease in P.E + Increase in K.E = 0?

Edit : Okay, thinking about it probably because of action-reaction pair with the Earth?

So work done on body = Decrease in P.E + Increase in K.E + work done by body?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
hqjb said:
Just a little confused, when work is done on an object it's energy increases right? (i.e. Work done on object = Change P.E + Change K.E + Work done by object)
I think you mean: Work done on object = Change PE + Change KE

When you use that particular form of the work-energy theorem--which includes a gravitational PE term--the work done means the work done by forces other than gravity. The effect of gravity is already included in the PE term. So, using that form of the theorem, you'd never include work done by gravity as part of the "work done" term.
So how come when gravitational force does work on an object(i.e. it falls) the potential energy decreases instead.
When an object falls, the only force acting is gravity. And since that's already included in the PE term, you'd set "work done on object (by forces other than gravity)" = 0. So:
0 = Change PE + Change KE

As the object falls the PE decreases while the KE increases.
 
Doc Al said:
I think you mean: Work done on object = Change PE + Change KE

When you use that particular form of the work-energy theorem--which includes a gravitational PE term--the work done means the work done by forces other than gravity. The effect of gravity is already included in the PE term. So, using that form of the theorem, you'd never include work done by gravity as part of the "work done" term.

When an object falls, the only force acting is gravity. And since that's already included in the PE term, you'd set "work done on object (by forces other than gravity)" = 0. So:
0 = Change PE + Change KE

As the object falls the PE decreases while the KE increases.

I kinda get it so during free fall, the Change in P.E. is negative = Work done by gravitational force on body = Gain in K.E.? If i bring it over it becomes 0.

So in case of mechanics, net work done(external energy transfer)(if I include gravitational force) never changes potential energy because work causes change in velocity not position (Am I right to say this)? Sorry if it seems illogical I'm trying to connect the dots.
 
hqjb said:
I kinda get it so during free fall, the Change in P.E. is negative = Work done by gravitational force on body = Gain in K.E.? If i bring it over it becomes 0.

So in case of mechanics, net work done(external energy transfer)(if I include gravitational force) never changes potential energy because work causes change in velocity not position (Am I right to say this)? Sorry if it seems illogical I'm trying to connect the dots.
Let me try again. The most basic form of the Work-Energy theorem is this:
Work done by all forces = ΔKE

If gravity is the only force acting, then:
Work done by gravity = ΔKE
-mgΔh = ΔKE
Rearranging:
0 = mgΔh + ΔKE = ΔPE + ΔKE

If you include the work done by gravity and the ΔPE term in your statement of the Work-Energy theorem, you'll get the wrong answer because you'll be counting gravity twice.
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top