Ball Up Incline: Total Energy & Height Q&A

  • Thread starter Thread starter mikefitz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ball Incline
AI Thread Summary
Total energy in the context of a rolling sphere includes both translational and rotational kinetic energy, expressed as KE = 1/2mv^2 + 1/2Iw^2. The equation PE = 1/1*Iw^2 mentioned was likely a typographical error, as it should represent rotational kinetic energy. The potential energy is typically calculated using mgh, which is standard for height-related energy calculations. The discussion clarifies that for a rolling object, total energy encompasses both forms of kinetic energy due to its motion. Understanding these concepts is crucial for accurately determining the total energy and height of the ball on the incline.
mikefitz
Messages
155
Reaction score
0
http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/5524/untitledll1.png

what I'm looking for is 1. the total energy of the sphere, and 2. the height of the ball after it has traveled up the incline.

i have some questions however. First, i understand that total energy = KE+PE. looking at the solution, KE=1/2mv^2. why does PE=1/1*Iw^2? this is the first time I've ever seen PE defined as such an equation.

in the second part of the solution, they use mgh - why isn't mgh used in the first solution? thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
mikefitz said:
i have some questions however. First, i understand that total energy = KE+PE. looking at the solution, KE=1/2mv^2. why does PE=1/1*Iw^2? this is the first time I've ever seen PE defined as such an equation.

The term 'PE=1/1*Iw^2' you were referring to was supposed to be the rotational kinetic energy of the sphere, which equals 1/2 I w^2, so I assume it was a mistype. You're right - total energy is defined as the sum of potential and kinetic energy - but, since you have a rolling sphere, the kinetic energy is the sum of rotational and translational kinetic energy.
 
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