Calculating KE Gain with Velocity Vectors: Explained and Simplified

  • Thread starter Thread starter phospho
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Vectors
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of kinetic energy (KE) gain involving velocity vectors. Participants are exploring the distinction between velocity as a vector and speed as its magnitude, particularly in the context of kinetic energy and conservation of momentum principles.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to apply the kinetic energy formula to vector velocities and are questioning how to correctly interpret and manipulate these vectors. There is confusion regarding the use of magnitudes versus actual vector values in calculations.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided clarifications about the need to use the magnitude of velocity vectors when calculating kinetic energy, while others are exploring the implications of using vectors in momentum calculations. There is an ongoing inquiry into the reasoning behind these distinctions, indicating a productive exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the definitions and applications of vector and scalar quantities in physics, particularly in the context of kinetic energy and momentum. There is mention of a textbook reference that may be influencing their understanding.

phospho
Messages
250
Reaction score
0
gain in KE = 0.5mv^2 - 0.5mu^2

where v and u is velocity

say we had an object moving with velocity (i + j), and after 5m it's velocity was (2i + j), would the gain in KE be:

[itex]0.5m(2^2 + 1^2)^2 - 0.5m(1^2+1^2)^2[/itex]

or

[itex]0.5(2i + j)^2m - 0.5(i+j)^2m[/itex]

Just confused what to do when vectors come into play

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
phospho said:
gain in KE = 0.5mv^2 - 0.5mu^2

where v and u is velocity
Technically, u and v are "speed" not "velocity". That's an important distinction when you are talking about vectors: "velocity" is a vector, "speed" is the magnitude of that vector.

say we had an object moving with velocity (i + j), and after 5m it's velocity was (2i + j), would the gain in KE be:

[itex]0.5m(2^2 + 1^2)^2 - 0.5m(1^2+1^2)^2[/itex]
No. The magitude of the vector ai+ bj is [itex]\sqrt{a^2+ b^2}[/itex] so the square of the magnitude is [itex]a^2+ b^2[/itex] You should have [itex]0.5m(2^2+ 1^2)- 0.5m(1^2+ 1^2)= 0.5m(3)[/itex]

or

[itex]0.5(2i + j)^2m - 0.5(i+j)^2m[/itex]
That's wrong because you can't square vectors like that.

Just confused what to do when vectors come into play

thanks
Neither of the formulas you give is correct. You have to work with the magnitude of the vectors. And, again, you have to distinguish between the vector velocity and the scalar speed.
 
HallsofIvy said:
Technically, u and v are "speed" not "velocity". That's an important distinction when you are talking about vectors: "velocity" is a vector, "speed" is the magnitude of that vector.


No. The magitude of the vector ai+ bj is [itex]\sqrt{a^2+ b^2}[/itex] so the square of the magnitude is [itex]a^2+ b^2[/itex] You should have [itex]0.5m(2^2+ 1^2)- 0.5m(1^2+ 1^2)= 0.5m(3)[/itex]


That's wrong because you can't square vectors like that.


Neither of the formulas you give is correct. You have to work with the magnitude of the vectors. And, again, you have to distinguish between the vector velocity and the scalar speed.

Okay, so if KE is 1/2mv^2, where v is a velocity vector (this is what my book says) then why do I take the magnitude of the velocity, rather than the actual velocity vector?

Here is an actual example:

6t3bpk.png


I don't particularly need help with the question but, if I was to use conservation of linear momentum on this problem:

My book says exactly this:

[itex]m_1u_1 + m_2u_2 = m_1v_1 + m_2v_2[/itex]
where a body of mass [itex]m_1[/itex] moving with a velocity [itex]u_1[/itex] collides with a body of mass [itex]m_2[/itex] moving with a velocity of [itex]u_2[/itex]. [itex]v_1[/itex] and [itex]v_2[/itex] are the velocities of the bodies after the collision.

Now using this concept on this problem, it would be [itex]mu + Mv = mp + Mq[/itex], however if the velocity vector was in the form of [itex]ai + bj[/itex], would it be [itex]m(ai + bj) + M(ci + dj) = m(ei + fj) + M(gi + hj)[/itex] I assume. Then for energy, why do I use the magnitude of the velocity, rather than the actual velocity vector?

I hope I've made my confusion clear, thanks for helping.
 
Your book is using the "dot product" (also called "inner product"). If v= ai+ bj+ ck then v.v= a^2+ b^2+ c^2 which is the same as the magnitude of the vector, squared. In either case, v^2 or |v|^2 is a number not a vector.
 
HallsofIvy said:
Your book is using the "dot product" (also called "inner product"). If v= ai+ bj+ ck then v.v= a^2+ b^2+ c^2 which is the same as the magnitude of the vector, squared. In either case, v^2 or |v|^2 is a number not a vector.

I haven't come across that yet.

I still don't understand why I need to use the magnitude of the vector for energy, but can use the actual vector for momentum.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
6K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K