Definition of potential energy

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the definition of potential energy, particularly the concept of potential energy difference in an electric field and the implications of moving a charge without acceleration. Participants explore the relationship between work done, potential energy, and kinetic energy, raising questions about the conditions under which these definitions hold true.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that potential energy is defined as the work done by an external force in moving a charge without acceleration, questioning the necessity of this condition.
  • Others argue that if a charge is accelerated, its kinetic energy changes, complicating the relationship between work done and potential energy.
  • A participant explains two cases: one where the charge remains at rest after movement (no acceleration) and another where it is moving (with acceleration), highlighting the difference in kinetic energy.
  • Some participants propose that the work-energy theorem relates net work to changes in kinetic energy, while others challenge this by introducing the concept of conservative and non-conservative forces.
  • There is a discussion about whether the equations relating work done by conservative forces to changes in potential energy and kinetic energy are universally applicable, with some participants expressing uncertainty.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of defining terms clearly when discussing these equations to avoid confusion.
  • Another participant notes that potential energy is attributed to conservative forces and that the work done by such forces does not depend on the path taken.
  • Some participants question the applicability of certain equations in scenarios involving only conservative forces, particularly in the context of movement without acceleration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of moving without acceleration in defining potential energy, the implications of the work-energy theorem, and the applicability of equations relating work, potential energy, and kinetic energy. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence of definitions on specific conditions, such as the presence of conservative versus non-conservative forces, and the implications of acceleration on kinetic energy. There are unresolved questions regarding the application of certain equations in various scenarios.

gracy
Messages
2,486
Reaction score
83
In my book definition of potential energy difference between two points as the work required to be done by an external force in moving without accelerating charge q from one point to another in electric field of any arbitrary charge configuration.I want to know why without accelerating ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
gracy said:
In my book definition of potential energy difference between two points as the work required to be done by an external force in moving without accelerating charge q from one point to another in electric field of any arbitrary charge configuration.I want to know why without accelerating ?

Because if you accelerate it, you also change the kinetic energy so that the work you do ends up being equal to the potential energy difference plus the change in kinetic energy.
 
Nugatory said:
you also change the kinetic energy so that the work you do ends up being equal to the potential energy difference plus the change in kinetic energy.
I did not understand.
 
gracy said:
I did not understand.

Consider a charged particle sitting somewhere in an electric field, at rest. Because it is at rest its kinetic energy is zero.
I do some work on it to move it somewhere else.

Case 1: It's at rest when I'm done moving it. This is the no-acceleration case, and the work that I did to move it is the change in the potential energy. There's no change in kinetic energy because it's at rest when I'm done moving it so the kinetic energy is still zero.

Case 2: It's not at rest when I'm done moving it, instead it's moving at speed ##v##. This is the case in which the particle did accelerate, and the particle now has kinetic energy ##\frac{mv^2}{2}##. The work that I did is the change in the potential energy from moving the particle, PLUS the work that I did to accelerate the particle and increase its kinetic energy.
 
Last edited:
Nugatory said:
The work that I did is the change in the potential energy from moving the particle, PLUS the work that I did to accelerate the particle and increase its kinetic energy.
I understood now.
It becomes ##W= ΔU+ ΔKE##
But As per definition
gracy said:
definition of potential energy difference between two points as the work required to be done by an external force in moving without accelerating charge q from one point to another in electric field of any arbitrary charge configuration

##W=ΔU##
That's why no acceleration.
 
gracy said:
In my book definition of potential energy difference between two points as the work required to be done by an external force in moving without accelerating charge q from one point to another in electric field of any arbitrary charge configuration.I want to know why without accelerating ?
Potential energy is attributed to conservative forces. The work of a conservative force on an object does not depend on the path taken. It depends only on the initial and final positions of the object. Force such forces, a potential energy function is defined, which depends on the position only.
Introducing an external force and zero acceleration into the definition causes lot of confusion. A simpler and less confusing definition of potential energy difference UB-UA between two points A and B is the negative work done by the force while the object moves from A to B: UB-UA=-WAB, or the work done by the force is the difference between the initial and final potential energy.
The potential energy at a point A is equal to the work the force does when the object moves from A to the place where the potential is zero. In case of the field of a point charge Q, the potential energy is zero at infinity.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: nasu
Nugatory said:
The work that I did is the change in the potential energy from moving the particle, PLUS the work that I did to accelerate the particle and increase its kinetic energy.
But work energy theorem says ##W##=##ΔKE##
 
No, it does not. The work done is the change in kinetic energy, \Delta KE, minus the change in potential energy, plus the work done against friction.

(Strictly speaking the "potential energy" only exists for a "conservative" force, in which there is no friction but if you are given a "potential energy" formula, you might have divided the force into a conservative part (as gravitational force), which has a potential energy, and a non-conservative part.)
 
Ok.
As per my understanding
##Wnet##=##ΔKE##
(According to work energy theorem)

##Wconservative##= ##-ΔP.E##
##Wnon conservative##=##ΔP.E##+##ΔK.E##
Am I correct?
 
  • #10
gracy said:
Ok.
As per my understanding
##Wnet##=##ΔKE##
(According to work energy theorem)

##Wconservative##= ##-ΔP.E##
##Wnon conservative##=##ΔP.E##+##ΔK.E##
Am I correct?
Equations by themselves do little without a definition of the terms in use.

Yes, the work done by a conservative force on an object moving in its field is equal and opposite to the change in potential energy between the starting point and the ending point of the path through which it moves.

However, the work done by a non-conservative force on an object moving in its field can have nothing whatsoever to do with the change in potential energy between the starting point and the ending point for the simple reason that there is no such thing as potential energy in a non-conservative field.
 
  • #11
Is it every time applicable
##Wconservative##=##-ΔP.E##=##ΔKE##
 
Last edited:
  • #12
gracy said:
Is it every time applicable
##Wconservative##=##-P.E##=##KE##
Again, I urge you to define your terms before simply writing down equations. What does "KE" in the above equation denote? Be specific. Do not simply say "Kinetic Energy". The kinetic energy of what?
 
  • #13
jbriggs444 said:
The kinetic energy of what?
Depends on context.That's what I am asking is this applicable always?That is irrespective of any scenario or situations?
 
  • #14
For example During a free fall there is change in KE of the body in the expense of PE.
 
  • #15
gracy said:
Is it every time applicable
##Wconservative##=##-P.E##=##KE##
No. This will work only if there are only conservative forces doing the work. So that W is the net work.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: gracy
  • #16
gracy said:
For example During a free fall there is change in KE of the body in the expense of PE.
Again, I urge you not to reply twice to the same posting. And again, I ask you to define the terms in your equation. "It depends" is not a definition.

What I am looking for is something that relates "Wconservative" to "-P.E." and to "KE"

Is KE, for instance supposed to mean the change in kinetic energy of an object subject [only] to a particular conservative force as it moves between a pair of endpoints? And is P.E. supposed to mean the change in potential energy as that object moves between the same endpoints? And is Wconservative supposed to denote the work done by the conservative force on that object over some path between those same endpoints?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: gracy
  • #17
gracy said:
Is it every time applicable
Wconservative=−ΔP.E-ΔP.E=ΔKE
nasu said:
No. This will work only if there are only conservative forces doing the work. So that W is the net work.
In my OP there is only conservative force but it says without acceleration that means ##ΔKE##=0
But ##ΔP.E## has nonzero magnitude which is equal to work done by conservative (electric)force
So even though it is only conservative force the below equation is not applicable
##W##=##-ΔP.E## =##ΔKE##
Right?
 
  • #18
gracy said:
In my OP there is only conservative force but it says without acceleration that means ##ΔKE##=0
But ##ΔP.E## has nonzero magnitude which is equal to work done by conservative (electric)force
So even though it is only conservative force the below equation is not applicable
##W##=##-ΔP.E## =##ΔKE##
Right?
In your original post there are two forces. There is the force from the field whose potential is being evaluated. And there is an external force.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: gracy
  • #19
jbriggs444 said:
Is KE, for instance supposed to mean the change in kinetic energy of an object subject [only] to a particular conservative force as it moves between a pair of endpoints?
Yes
jbriggs444 said:
is P.E. supposed to mean the change in potential energy as that object moves between the same endpoints?
Yes.
jbriggs444 said:
And is Wconservative supposed to denote the work done by the conservative force on that object over some path between those same endpoints?
Yes.
According to me.You decide this is the
question

A charge s moved in an electric field of a fixed charge distribution from point A to another point B SLOWLY.The work done by external agent in doing so is 100J.
 
  • #20
gracy said:
Ok.
As per my understanding
##Wnet##=##ΔKE##
(According to work energy theorem)

OK. Now, what is Wnet also equal to? You're lacking one step necessary to get to your last equation below.

##Wconservative##= ##-ΔP.E##
##Wnon conservative##=##ΔP.E##+##ΔK.E##
Am I correct?
 
  • #21
gracy said:
Ok.
As per my understanding
##Wnet##=##ΔKE##
(According to work energy theorem)

##Wconservative##= ##-ΔP.E##
##Wnon conservative##=##ΔP.E##+##ΔK.E##
Am I correct?
I don't know. Personally, I wouldn't look at it this way. I would let the math resolve the issue for me. Here's a one dimensional example. Suppose I have a charged particle of mass m and charge q in an electric field E (directed along the positive x axis), and I exert a force F along the x-axis to move the charge from x1 to x2. If a write a force balance on the system, I get:
$$m\frac{dv}{dt}=F+qE$$
Since an electric field is conservative, it can be represented as minus the derivative of the potential U. So, I have:
$$m\frac{dv}{dt}=F-q\frac{dU}{dx}$$
If I substitute dt=dx/v into this equation, I get
$$mv\frac{dv}{dx}=F-q\frac{dU}{dx}$$
Integrating this equation from x1 to x2 yields
$$\left(m\frac{v^2}{2}\right)_{x_2}-\left(m\frac{v^2}{2}\right)_{x_1}=\int_{x_1}^{x_2}Fdx-q(U(x_2)-U(x_1))$$
The terms on the left hand side of this equation is the change in kinetic energy. The first term on the right hand side is the external work done on the charge. The second term on the right hand side is minus the change in potential energy. So
$$Δ(KE)=W-Δ(PE)$$or
$$W=Δ(PE)+Δ(KE)$$
If the work is done in such a way that the change in kinetic energy is zero, then the work is equal to the change in potential energy.

Chet
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: gracy
  • #22
jtbell said:
Wnet also equal to?
##Wnet##=##Wconservative##+##Wnonconservative##
 
  • #23
OK, so with that step, and your first two equations, you should be able to verify that your final equation is correct, with a tiny bit of algebra.
 
  • #24
jbriggs444 said:
In your original post there are two forces. There is the force from the field whose potential is being evaluated. And there is an external force.
Oh,yes.Please look at my post 19
 
  • #25
jtbell said:
, you should be able to verify that your final equation is correct,
Are all my equations correct?
 
  • #26
Chestermiller said:
If the work is done in such a way that the change in kinetic energy is zero, then the work is equal to the change in potential energy.
No matter what the force is conservative or non conservative?
 
  • #27
Non-conservative forces don't have potential energy associated with them. Chestermiller's statement applies if there are no non-conservative forces acting on the object; that is, if the only forces are conservative.
 
  • #28
jtbell said:
Chestermiller's statement applies if there are no non-conservative forces acting on the object.
so it's only for conservative forces,right?
 
  • #29
Right.
 
  • #30
So conservative forces can contribute to kinetic energy also?
##Wconservative##ΔPE## +##ΔKE##
Is the formula above correct?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
7K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K