Confusion about gravitational potential

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the confusion surrounding gravitational potential energy and its relation to motion in a pendulum system. It highlights that choosing a reference height for gravitational potential affects the total energy calculation, but the physical motion of the pendulum remains unchanged regardless of this choice. The key point is that only changes in potential energy are physically relevant, not the absolute values. The analogy of measuring height emphasizes that the difference in position is what matters, not the specific reference point. Ultimately, understanding that "zero mechanical energy" does not equate to "no motion" clarifies the misconceptions about energy conservation in this context.
ShayanJ
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
2,801
Reaction score
606
I thought I know introductory physics well but now I'm confused about simple things!
Imagine a pendulum. Its released from rest from a height. We take that height to be the zero level of the gravitational potential. But that means its total energy is zero at the beginning and because of the conservation of energy its going to remain zero and so there is no motion. But if we choose another height as the origin, then the energy is non-zero and there is motion. But what happens shouldn't depend on our choices. What am I missing here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Recall that it is only changes-in-potential energy that are physically relevant (not the values themselves).
Today, I made the analogy that the position of your head (as read by a vertical meterstick) is not a physically meaningful measurement of your height. Instead, it is the change-in-position from your feet to your head.

"Zero Mechanical Energy" doesn't mean "no motion" (K=0 and delta-K=0)... it means that K+U=0.
If (delta-E)=0, then (delta-K)= - (delta-U).
 
Oh...dammit, Of course!
 
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