Conversion of Potential Energy: Sound or Heat?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the conversion of potential energy when a coin is dropped onto a glass surface, specifically whether the majority of this energy is transformed into sound or heat. Participants explore various aspects of energy transfer, including kinetic energy, sound energy, and the implications of different surface materials.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the majority of potential energy is converted to sound, while others argue that heat is the primary form of energy conversion.
  • One participant notes that the kinetic energy of the rebounding coin should also be considered, stating that all energy eventually ends up as heat.
  • There is a discussion about measuring sound energy through amplitude and duration, although some express reluctance to engage in such calculations.
  • One participant explains that sound energy is relatively low due to the poor coupling between high-density materials (like coins) and low-density materials (like air).
  • Another participant proposes that changing the surface to a louder material, like a steel drum, could indicate that more kinetic energy is converted to sound energy, suggesting a relationship between sound intensity and energy conversion.
  • Conversely, some participants challenge the logic behind using sound intensity changes to infer kinetic energy relationships, arguing that such measurements do not provide clear insights into the energy dynamics of the coin.
  • There is a mention of specific sound power outputs from everyday sources to illustrate the relatively small amounts of acoustic energy compared to kinetic energy.
  • One participant emphasizes that ultimately, all potential energy is converted into internal energy of the air, the table, and the coin, with sound energy dissipating into internal energy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the primary form of energy conversion (sound vs. heat) and the implications of sound intensity measurements. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives on the topic.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about energy transfer and the nature of collisions are not fully explored, and there are unresolved questions regarding the measurement of sound and heat energy in this context.

Darmstadtium
Messages
10
Reaction score
3
When a coin is dropped from a certain height and collides with a glass surface, is the majority of the potential energy converted to sound or heat? And how would one determine this as I only hear the sound and cannot measure the significant change in temperature?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There’s also the kinetic energy of the rebounding coin to consider, but one way or another it all ends up as heat eventually.
In principle we can measure the amplitude and duration of the sound waves and use that to calculate the amount of energy they carry away.

In practice this is the sort of calculation that we try to avoid,
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and Bystander
Nugatory said:
In practice this is the sort of calculation that we try to avoid,
Yeah, just wait until the sound becomes heat too.
 
Darmstadtium said:
When a coin is dropped from a certain height and collides with a glass surface, is the majority of the potential energy converted to sound or heat? And how would one determine this as I only hear the sound and cannot measure the significant change in temperature?
As a rule of thumb, sound is pretty low energy. This is because high density materials (like coins and counter-tops) can carry a lot of energy with a little motion while low density materials (like air) need a lot of motion in order to carry much energy at all. This means when the coin or countertop vibrate from an impact and the resulting motion is imparted to the air, not much energy is transferred. We say that the materials "couple" poorly.

If you have an interface between materials with similar densities, vibration energy passes through the interface easily. If you have an interface between materials with very different densities the vibration energy tends to reflect insead. This is very much analogous to the way that light behaves going between materials with a different refractive indices.

Consider, for instance, a tuning fork. It takes significant time to transfer vibration energy from fork to air.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, Lnewqban and PeroK
If it was mostly sound, then a coin would bounce much higher in a vacuum.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, nasu, Nugatory and 2 others
Darmstadtium said:
When a coin is dropped from a certain height and collides with a glass surface, is the majority of the potential energy converted to sound or heat? And how would one determine this as I only hear the sound and cannot measure the significant change in temperature?
Change the glass surface to something much louder, a steel drum for instance. If the noise increases by more than 3dB, this means that, with the glass, the kinetic energy of the coin was more than twice the sound energy. So the heat must be greater.
 
kered rettop said:
Change the glass surface to something much louder, a steel drum for instance. If the noise increases by more than 3dB, this means that, with the glass, the kinetic energy of the coin was more than twice the sound energy. So the heat must be greater.
This doesn't make any sense. If the noise increases by more than 3dB (power (intensity) level (SIL)) or 6dB (sound pressure level, SPL) that means the energy in the air has doubled. It tells you nothing about the kinetic energy in the coin and also nothing about the relative quantities of kinetic energy in the coin and air.
 
Arjan82 said:
This doesn't make any sense. If the noise increases by more than 3dB (power (intensity) level (SIL)) or 6dB (sound pressure level, SPL) that means the energy in the air has doubled. It tells you nothing about the kinetic energy in the coin and also nothing about the relative quantities of kinetic energy in the coin and air.
If you can drop the same coin from the same distance and get twice the sound energy out, that means that less than half of the coin's energy could have gone into the softer sound.

Similarly, if you can drop the same coin from the same distance and get four times the sound energy out, that means that less than 25% of the coin's energy could have gone into the softer sound.
 
To drive home the point of @jbriggs444. Look here for a table with sound powers for every day sources. Note for example:

A hair dryer puts 10-6 Watt of acoustic energy in its surroundings, an accelerating motorcycle 0.1 Watt, A sonic boom of a Jet fighter is about 1 Watt. Note that these numbers are incredibly small compared to their kinetic energy or power consumption.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, PeroK and phinds
  • #10
jbriggs444 said:
If you can drop the same coin from the same distance and get twice the sound energy out, that means that less than half of the coin's energy could have gone into the softer sound.

Similarly, if you can drop the same coin from the same distance and get four times the sound energy out, that means that less than 25% of the coin's energy could have gone into the softer sound.
Ah, ok, true.

[edit]Forget that last remark, the amount of input energy is the same of course[/edit]
 
  • #11
Arjan82 said:
Ah, ok, true. But that's a bit of a stretch to me since you then also assume that both with the glass and drums you impart exactly the same amount of kinetic energy to the drums / glass. That might require a totally different hit.
The scenario in the OP, as I understand it has the coin striking a surface and ultimately coming to rest. Totally inelastic collision except for any sound energy that is radiated.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Arjan82
  • #12
jbriggs444 said:
If you can drop the same coin from the same distance and get twice the sound energy out, that means that less than half of the coin's energy could have gone into the softer sound.

Similarly, if you can drop the same coin from the same distance and get four times the sound energy out, that means that less than 25% of the coin's energy could have gone into the softer sound.
Thanks :oldbiggrin:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Arjan82
  • #13
Ultimately, all the potential energy of the coin is converted into internal energy of the air (most of it), table (a tiny fraction), and coin (a tiny fraction). All the sound energy is dissipated to internal energy.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
907
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K