Confusion between kinetic energy and potential energy

AI Thread Summary
Kinetic energy is defined as the energy associated with motion, specifically related to an object's velocity. In contrast, potential energy refers to the energy associated with an object's position, particularly in relation to gravitational forces. The distinction lies in kinetic energy being linked to movement, while potential energy is tied to an object's location within a gravitational field. Understanding these differences is crucial for grasping fundamental concepts in physics. This clarification helps to eliminate confusion between the two types of energy.
RunToFreeForFly
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
What is the different
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can think of Kinetic Energy as an "energy associated with motion [velocity]".
You can think of Potential Energy as an "energy associated with position".
 
kinetic is got to do with motion ---> velocity

pential energy is generally to do with gravity, which depends on the position of the mass from the centre of gravity
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

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?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Hamilton’s principle maximises potential energy?
Replies
5
Views
1K
B Can energy be decomposed?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Why do we add Kinetic and Potential energy?
Replies
3
Views
1K
How does gravity convert potential energy to kinetic?
Replies
2
Views
1K
I How can we prove the kinetic energy equation
Replies
2
Views
1K
B Study of SHM of an object attached to a vertical spring
Replies
7
Views
630
I Potential energy of a pressurized gas canister in space
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Change of coordinates in a potential energy field
Replies
2
Views
1K
Is there any motion hidden within potential energy?
Replies
7
Views
1K
I Torque and Rotational Kinetic Energy Relationship
Replies
4
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top