Classical mechanics - Conservative system

Click For Summary
In a conservative system, total energy remains constant over time, which is a defining characteristic of a constant of motion. Potential energy (PE) is not a constant of motion since it can change based on an object's position, even though it is a function of position alone and not explicitly time-dependent. The time-independent nature of PE is essential for it to be considered conservative, as any time-dependent potential energy would violate the principles of conservation. If a system's potential energy is expressed as a function of both position and time, it cannot be classified as conservative. Thus, the relationship between potential energy and time is crucial in determining the nature of the system.
student00
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Could you please address the following?

(1) For a conservative system, total energy (E = KE + PE) is a constant. It does not depend on time. Is it because of this time-independent nature that E is a constant of motion?

(2) For a conservative system, the PE is a function of position coordinates alone. It does not depend on time 'explicitly'. If so, is PE a constant of motion?

(3) Is the time-independent nature of PE a characteristic feature of a conservative system?

(4) Is PE a function of position coordinates and time for a non-conservative system?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
(1) I'm not sure if I understood your question, but if a quantity doesn't change over time, then by definition it's a constant of motion.

(2) The total potential energy of a conservative system can change, so then it is not a constant of motion. If the potential energy function depends on position, then the potential energy of an object will necessarily depend on time, because the object's motion will cause it to change position over time.

(3) and (4) By "time-independent", I take it you mean that the potential energy of an object U is a function like U(r) and not U(r, t). I wouldn't call this time-independent, because the position r can still change with time. All this means is that if the object(s) don't change their position (or relative position if we're considering the potential energy of two objects), then the potential energy doesn't change.

At any rate, your question is an interesting one. If the potential energy isn't "time-independent" (using your definition of time-independent), then it's worth noting that by definition, it isn't potential energy proper. Potential energy MUST be of the form U(r), without time mentioned explicitly. To see why U(r, t) wouldn't be conservative, just imagined that you took an object and moved it around in a closed loop. For a conservative force, there cannot be a change in potential energy. But if the potential energy was "time-dependent", then there would almost surely be a change, because there's no guarantee that U(r, t_1) = U(r, t_2).

Alternatively, suppose two interacting objects initially at rest had a pole attached between them, so that their distance from one another couldn't change. By the conservation of momentum, neither of them can start moving (there must be a zero net momentum, and they can't start moving towards one another because of the pole), so the total kinetic energy will remain zero. However, the potential energy, if it is "time-dependent", will change, so that the total energy is not constant.

On the other hand, if a potential energy function is "time-independent", that does not mean it is conservative. Friction is a good example.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K