High School Difference between W=-(ΔU) and negative U.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the distinction between the equation W=-ΔU and the concept of potential energy being negative when the reference point is at infinity. W=-ΔU represents the work done as the negative change in potential energy, derived from the work-energy theorem and conservation of energy principles. The statement regarding potential energy being negative at infinity is not universally applicable, as there are systems where potential energy can be positive. The conversation emphasizes that the sign convention in W=-ΔU is arbitrary and context-dependent, particularly in gravitational systems.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the work-energy theorem
  • Familiarity with gravitational potential energy concepts
  • Knowledge of conservation of energy principles
  • Basic grasp of thermodynamic systems and adiabatic processes
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the work-energy theorem in classical mechanics
  • Explore gravitational potential energy and its reference points
  • Study the implications of sign conventions in physics equations
  • Investigate the behavior of potential energy in various force fields, such as Coulomb's law
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, educators, and professionals interested in classical mechanics, energy conservation, and the nuances of potential energy in different contexts.

donaldparida
Messages
146
Reaction score
10
Is there any difference between the meaning of the equation W=-ΔU and the meaning of the statement that potential energy of system is always negative when the reference point(zero point) is taken to be located at infinity or do they both convey the same message?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I see no link between the two statements.

Note also that the statement that "the potential energy of system is always negative when the reference point(zero point) is taken to be located at infinity" is not absolutely true. There are systems that can have positive potential energy even in that case.
 
I should also point out that the sign in W=-ΔU is also a convention, that positive work is work done by the system, not on the system. That convention is far from universal.
 
Doesn't W=-ΔU come from the law of conservation of energy?(when there is positive increase in K.E. there must be negative increase or simply decrease in the P.E. so that the total energy remains constant.)
 
donaldparida said:
Doesn't W=-ΔU come from the law of conservation of energy?(when there is positive increase in K.E. there must be negative increase or simply decrease in the P.E. so that the total energy remains constant.)
It comes from conservation of energy when dealing with adiabatic processes. But my point was about the sign in the equation, which is somewhat arbitrary.
 
There is a difference.
While W=-ΔU talks about the work done W is the difference between two states of the potential energy ΔU (if both end results are at rest is the only time it really applies, on other occasions it is W=-(ΔU+ΔE[kinetic]) ).
The other says that when you consider a two body system under the influence of a conservative force, that is there is potential energy, the reference point of infinity is taken as the point of 0 energy. However the statement is inaccurate because negative energy in such a case happens in a system with at least two bodies bound to one another.
 
##\Delta U## is the change in internal energy, not just potential energy. It includes kinetic energy.
 
Dale said:
##\Delta U## is the change in internal energy, not just potential energy. It includes kinetic energy.
For some reason our professors said otherwise. Guess either they mistook or convention is not the same in every place. Some people use j as the sqrt(-1) on single plane complex numbers, where as others use i for instance.
 
@donaldparida can you clarify the context? Is this for a thermodynamic system undergoing an adiabatic process, or something else?
 
  • Like
Likes nasu
  • #10
No, this question is not related to a thermodynamic system undergoing adiabatic process. It is related to the gravitational potential energy of a system.
 
  • #11
Ah, please ignore my comments above. They were in the wrong context.

The equation has nothing whatsoever to do with setting the reference at infinity. In fact, it shows that any reference can be used since ##\Delta U## is independent of the reference.
 
  • Like
Likes donaldparida
  • #12
Is it correct to say that if the reference point is set at infinity only then the potential energy is negative and if we select any other reference point, the potential energy is positive?
 
  • #13
if the reference point is set at infinity only then the potential energy is ALWAYS negative and if we select any other reference point, the potential energy is SOMETIMES positive
 
  • Like
Likes donaldparida
  • #14
donaldparida said:
No, this question is not related to a thermodynamic system undergoing adiabatic process. It is related to the gravitational potential energy of a system.
Then ignore my comments. For me, W = -ΔU is a thermodynamical statement.

It is always useful to state the context of the question :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #15
@Dale , so in conclusion, the equation W=-ΔU (meaning that the work done is the negative of the change in potential energy) and the fact that the potential energy of a system when the reference point is taken at infinity is always negative have no relation with each other and the equation W=-ΔU comes from the work-energy theorem and the law of conservation of energy. Right? Also is there any reference point for which the potential energy of a system always comes out to be positive?
 
  • #16
donaldparida said:
in conclusion, the equation W=-ΔU (meaning that the work done is the negative of the change in potential energy) and the fact that the potential energy of a system when the reference point is taken at infinity is always negative have no relation with each other
Correct.
donaldparida said:
Also is there any reference point for which the potential energy of a system always comes out to be positive?
R=0, but in practice that is never used because it would be positive and infinite everywhere.
 
  • #17
Dale said:
R=0, but in practice that is never used because it would be positive and infinite everywhere.
For 1/r^2 forces yes.
 
  • #18
  • #19
In forces such as coulomb's law and Newton's formula for gravity, notice that r is in the denominator. r refers to the distance between the object and the source. In the case of these two forces, the two objects feel each other of course. If you try to find the limit of 1/r as r approaches 0, you will find the result gets bigger and bigger and diverges to infinity.
However do note, that is true for point objects, in reality if you know the force in every single location there are some physical systems where the force does not diverge when r=0, and again it depends on the problem. In certain systems you can define r=0 as the point of 0 potential energy and not have the result infinite everywhere.
Systems such as distributed charge in a sphere, or an object with its mass distributed in a certain configuration in space, would not necessarily yield infinity when r=0.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K