Why Does a Local Minimum in Potential Energy Indicate Higher Stability?

AI Thread Summary
A local minimum in potential energy indicates higher stability because the force acting on an object is directed towards the minimum when it is displaced. At the bottom of a potential well, moving away from the minimum results in an increase in potential energy, causing a restoring force that pushes the object back. Conversely, at a maximum, any displacement leads to a force that pushes the object further away, making it unstable. This principle explains why systems tend to settle in states of lower potential energy. Understanding these dynamics is crucial in fields like mechanics and physics.
Bhargav
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Okay
We all know that the most stable state of a system (say an object undergoing SHM)is when it has minimum Potential Energy.
Can somebody tell me why a local minimum in the potential energy correponds to a higher stability than some other arbitary state?
(Not too much of quantum theory please!)

Cheers
Bhargav
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's simple really. The force exerted by a given potential is equal to minus the gradient. If you're sitting at the bottom of a potential well the potential is rising when you move away from the minimum, thus the force will push you back to the minimum. If you're at the top of a potential hill then when you move away from the maximum the force will continue to push you away.

So minimums are stable because small motions away from the minimum will tend to push you back towards the minimum whereas maximums are unstable because small motions away from the maximum well tend to push you away from the maximum.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
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