Can a rotating object have zero kinetic energy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter esmeralda4
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rotating Zero
AI Thread Summary
Kinetic energy (KE) is a scalar quantity, not a vector, meaning it does not cancel out like vectors do. A rotating object cannot have zero total kinetic energy simply because its velocity components may be equal and opposite. Instead, it possesses rotational kinetic energy, which is distinct from linear kinetic energy. The formula for kinetic energy involves the square of velocity, derived from the vector dot product of velocity with itself. Therefore, a rotating object can have kinetic energy even if its linear velocity components appear to balance out.
esmeralda4
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
Hi,

Since velocity is a vector quantity I assume it follows that KE must also by a vector since KE=1/2mv squared.

Is it true to say a rotating object has zero total velocity since + = - and therefore the total KE is zero?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, because kinetic energy is not a vector quantity. It is a scalar. Think of the ##v^2## as coming from the vector dot product of the velocity with itself: ##v^2 = \vec v \cdot \vec v = v_x^2 + v_y^2 + v_z^2##.

There is such a thing as rotational kinetic energy.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/rke.html
 
Last edited:
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top