Conservation of Energy: Solving for Δv, Integrals, Derivatives

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
8 replies · 2K views
redrum419_7
Messages
58
Reaction score
0
1) [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]mv[itex]^{2}_{2}[/itex]-mgy[itex]_{2}[/itex] = [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]mv[itex]^{2}_{1}[/itex]-mgy[itex]_{1}[/itex]

2) [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]m(v[itex]^{2}_{2}[/itex]-2gy[itex]_{2}[/itex]) = [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]m(v[itex]^{2}_{1}[/itex]-2gy[itex]_{1}[/itex])

since g = [itex]\frac{GM}{R^{2}}[/itex] and [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]m cancels.

3) v[itex]^{2}_{2}[/itex]-2[itex]\frac{GM}{R^{2}}[/itex]y[itex]_{2}[/itex] = v[itex]^{2}_{1}[/itex]-2[itex]\frac{GM}{R^{2}}[/itex]y[itex]_{1}[/itex]

4) v[itex]^{2}_{2}[/itex]-v[itex]^{2}_{1}[/itex] = 2[itex]\frac{GM}{R^{2}}[/itex]y[itex]_{2}[/itex]-2[itex]\frac{GM}{R^{2}}[/itex]y[itex]_{1}[/itex]

5) v[itex]^{2}_{2}[/itex]-v[itex]^{2}_{1}[/itex] = 2[itex]\frac{GM}{R^{2}}[/itex](y[itex]_{2}[/itex]-y[itex]_{1}[/itex])

6) [itex]\frac{Δ(v^{2})}{Δy}[/itex] = 2[itex]\frac{GM}{R^{2}}[/itex], if R is along y-axis

then d(v[itex]^{2}[/itex]) = 2[itex]\frac{GM}{y^{2}}[/itex]dy

Can someone give me a tip on where to go from here? Would an integral or derivative have any significance? Or are there any errors? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. ( I know v = √2gy )
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
redrum419_7 said:
1) [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]mv[itex]^{2}_{2}[/itex]-mgy[itex]_{2}[/itex] = [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]mv[itex]^{2}_{1}[/itex]-mgy[itex]_{1}[/itex]
Why the minus signs?

2) [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]m(v[itex]^{2}_{2}[/itex]-2gy[itex]_{2}[/itex]) = [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]m(v[itex]^{2}_{1}[/itex]-2gy[itex]_{1}[/itex])

since g = [itex]\frac{GM}{R^{2}}[/itex] and [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]m cancels.
Note that PE = mgy only holds close to the Earth's surface. g is a constant and R here equals the radius of the earth. If you want to describe PE for larger ranges of distance, you cannot use PE = mgy. For a more general expression for potential energy see: Gravitational Potential Energy
 
Well, doc, you might remember that I was banned for seven days for being stubborn that the potential energy is the work done to bring an object from infinity to the point? The same is said in the link you provided.
 
vin300 said:
Well, doc, you might remember that I was banned for seven days for being stubborn that the potential energy is the work done to bring an object from infinity to the point? The same is said in the link you provided.
There's nothing wrong with such a statement, when applied to situations where the force goes to zero at infinity.
 
Doc Al said:
Why the minus signs?

[/URL]

Isn't U(x) = -G(x)
 
from the last part d(v[itex]^{2}[/itex]) = [itex]\frac{2GM}{y^{2}}[/itex]dy, if you take the integral, ∫d(v[itex]^{2}[/itex]) = ∫2[itex]\frac{GM}{y^{2}}[/itex]dy

v[itex]^{2}[/itex] = -[itex]\frac{2GM}{y}[/itex], set v to c and rearrange y, you get

y=-[itex]\frac{2GM}{c^{2}}[/itex]

or

R[itex]_{s}[/itex]=-[itex]\frac{2GM}{c^{2}}[/itex], would this be a valid derivation of the Schwarzschild radius?
 
redrum419_7 said:
Isn't U(x) = -G(x)
I don't understand your notation.

U(x) = -∫F(x)dx
 
Doc Al said:
I don't understand your notation.

U(x) = -∫F(x)dx

Yeah G(x) =∫F(x)dx, that's what my teacher uses.
 
I see why it is not a minus sign, because from the integral and and the minus sign, it will be positive.