Conservative system <-> time independent potential?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between conservative forces and time-dependent potential energy. It highlights that while a force can be derived from a potential function, if that potential is time-dependent, energy is not conserved. Participants clarify that conservative forces are typically associated with time-independent potentials, as energy conservation is a key characteristic. The conversation also touches on the definitions of conservative forces, emphasizing that they must be expressible as the gradient of a scalar function. Ultimately, the distinction between conservative forces and time-dependent potentials is critical for understanding energy conservation in physical systems.
Coffee_
Messages
259
Reaction score
2
Is it possible that the potential energy depends on the time and the system is conservative?

Let me elaborate. Consider a function ##U(\vec{r},t)## and consider the case where the forces in space at any moment are given by ##\vec{F}=-\nabla{U}##. So in this case, according to the definition of conservative, the force field is conservative.

However the energy is time dependent ( since the Lagrangian would be time dependent the energy is not conserved ).

QUESTION: Often I have seen conservative and time-independent potential energy used interchangably. As you see, it seems to be not the case. So what's the real connection between conservative and time independent?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A mass attached to a spring that is allowed to oscillate up and down (in the absence of air resistance) seems to fit your parameters.
 
AlephNumbers said:
A mass attached to a spring that is allowed to oscillate up and down (in the absence of air resistance) seems to fit your parameters.

What? I'm not sure I follow. The potential energy in that case is only a function of the position, not time explicitly.
 
assed said:
Yes, Cofee_ you are right. the case mentioned by AlephNumbers does not fit your case.
Answering your question, a conservative force is related to a time independent potential because if that is not the case energy is not conserved.
Take a look at this :
http://physics.stackexchange.com/qu...me-dependent-classical-system-be-conservative
Yes I understand that energy is not conserved, but what about the definitions of a conservative force as :

"A force is conservative if there exists a function of which the force is a gradient" : See : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_force
 
Oh...so all you are worried about is nomenclature. Call it what you want, I call a conservative force a force that results in conservation of energy and one necessary condition is that it can be written a the gradient of a time-independent scalar function.
 
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