Chemical Potential Energy and Kinetic Energy

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the conversion of chemical potential energy in gasoline to kinetic energy in a car accelerating from 0 mph to 64 mph. It emphasizes using the kinetic energy formula, KE = 1/2mv^2, to determine the energy required for different speed increments. The energy needed to accelerate from 32 mph to 64 mph is calculated to be three times greater than that required to accelerate from 0 mph to 32 mph. The conclusion drawn is that the energy required for the latter speed increase is three times as much, based on the calculations provided. Understanding the relationship between kinetic energy and chemical potential energy is crucial for solving such problems.
pewpew23
Messages
15
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



The chemical potential energy in a certain amount of gasoline is converted to kinetic energy in a car that increased its speed from 0 mph to 32 mph. The car accelerated to 64 mph. Compared to the energy required to go from 0 to 32 mph, the energy required to go from 32 mph to 64 mph is

(A) half as much
(B) as much
(C) twice as much
(D) three times as much
(E) four times as much

Homework Equations



KE = 1/2mv^2

The Attempt at a Solution



Is there any equation for chemical potential energy?
I don't know what to do with just the KE equation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The chemical potential energy in this question is a red herring. All you need is the kinetic energy. If you need twice as much kinetic energy, then you need twice as much chemical potential energy, it's a 1-1 correspondence (at least for simple problems like this, other factors such as engine efficiency at different temperatures are too complicated for this).
 
so going from 0 to 64 would require twice as much kinetic and chemical potential energy as going from 0 to 32?

and going to 0 to 32 would require the same amount as going to 32 to 64?
 
No, use your formula. KE=1/2mv^2

KE final - KE initial = energy required
 
1/2m(32)^2 - 1/2(0)^2 = 512m

1/2m(64)^2 - 512m = 1536m

512m/1536 = 3 times as much
 
Yea, looks good to me, except energy is expressed in J=joules not meters. =)
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top