Determining non-conserved work from a collision

In summary, the conversation discusses the change in kinetic and potential energy during a collision, specifically in regards to conservation of work. The speaker notes that in a coalescence, kinetic energy is lost and work cannot be assumed to be conserved without good reason. They also mention using conservation of momentum to find the final velocity and calculate the change in kinetic energy. However, it is advised to solve the problem algebraically rather than plugging in numbers right away.
  • #1
JoeyBob
256
29
Homework Statement
see attached
Relevant Equations
W=change in kinetic energy
So I know from a previous part of the problem that the kinetic energy right before the collision is 94.556.

The non conserved work would also equal the change in kinetic energy + change in potential energy.

What I don't understand is how the potential or kinetic energy would change during the collision. The potential energy is already 0 and wouldn't the kinetic energy just be transferred (so the object would slow down because its heavier).

answer is suppose to be -47.32
 

Attachments

  • wquestion.PNG
    wquestion.PNG
    13 KB · Views: 103
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
JoeyBob said:
wouldnt the kinetic energy just be transferred
Never assume work is conserved without good reason. In a coalescence, as here, you can use conservation of momentum to find the new speed, and you will see that KE has been lost.
 
  • #3
haruspex said:
Never assume work is conserved without good reason. In a coalescence, as here, you can use conservation of momentum to find the new speed, and you will see that KE has been lost.
So from conservation of momentum I find that the final velocity was 3.075, which gives a final kinetic energy, which allows me to calculate the change, which let's me find the work.
 
  • #4
JoeyBob said:
So from conservation of momentum I find that the final velocity was 3.075, which gives a final kinetic energy, which allows me to calculate the change, which let's me find the work.
Yes, but it is much better, for several reasons, to solve a problem purely algebraically, only plugging in numbers at the very end. Had you done that, you would have found it was unnecessary to find the velocities, neither before impact nor after.
 
Back
Top