Are only vectors capable of being negative in physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pantheid
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Negative Vectors
AI Thread Summary
Vectors in physics, such as force, acceleration, and velocity, can indeed have negative values due to their directional nature. In contrast, scalar quantities like mass and kinetic energy are always non-negative, as mass is defined to be positive and kinetic energy involves the square of velocity. However, potential energy, which is also a scalar, can be negative in contexts like gravitational fields and electrical potential. The key distinction lies in the fact that vectors have direction, while scalars do not. Therefore, the claim that only vectors can be negative is not entirely accurate.
pantheid
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
I want to make the above claim in a physics paper for my intro to physics class, but first I want to confirm if it is absolutely correct. My reasoning goes that Force, acceleration, and velocity, can be negative, but mass and kinetic energy cannot be. Is my conjecture sound?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
no. as one example, check on the negative potential of a gravitational field...potential energy being a scalar.

Another example would be electrical potential,,,,positive and negative.

How about time?
 
I think mass is defined to be positive. It follows that kinetic energy is positive since it involves mass (m ≥ 0) and the squared modulus of velocity, which is necessarily positive (or zero).

I would be hesitant about answering your question with a yes though. The distinction you are looking for (I think) is that vector quantities have what we interpret as direction, while scalar quantities don't. In your examples force, acceleration and velocity are all vector quantities, while mass and kinetic energy are scalar quantities.

And as Naty1 says, potential energy can be negative.
 
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...
Back
Top