Does the angle of fall affect the change in kinetic energy of a log?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores whether the angle of fall affects the change in kinetic energy of a log. Two scenarios are presented: one where the log falls straight down and another where it falls at a 60° angle. Despite the difference in the distance between the center of masses in each case, the kinetic energy remains unchanged. Both scenarios result in zero kinetic energy after the log comes to rest, as they both had the same potential energy just before impact. The conclusion emphasizes that no energy is required to move the log from one stationary position to another.
Manula
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
There is a uniform log lying on the ground.Now we can lift this up from one end such that the other end is in contact with the ground.Now keep the log vertical.

Case 1: Let the log fall freely such that when it comes to rest it is inline with the initial position of the log.

Case 2: Let the log fall freely such that it makes angle(say 60°) with the initial position when it comes to rest.

My question is, in the two cases the distance between the center of masses of the log in its initial position and final is different, Even though the cases are similar.
What causes this difference?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Manula! :smile:
Manula said:
… in the two cases the distance between the center of masses of the log in its initial position and final is different, Even though the cases are similar.
What causes this difference?

There's no difference in kinetic energy …

they both end up with zero KE (and they both had mgh KE just before they hit the ground) …

we don't need any energy to move something from one stationary position to another! :wink:​
 
tiny-tim, Thank you! :)
 

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
View full post »

Similar threads

B Can energy be decomposed?
Replies
2
Views
1K
I Change of coordinates in a potential energy field
Replies
2
Views
1K
Kinetic energy change with initial velocity
Replies
6
Views
4K
B Work done in lifting and lowering an object
Replies
34
Views
4K
I Work Done/Energy Transferred in One Dimensional Collision
Replies
5
Views
2K
I Question about a Rotating system with mass moving inwards
Replies
19
Views
2K
Understanding the work-kinetic energy theorem
Replies
7
Views
2K
Power and Change of Kinetic Energy in Variable Mass System
Replies
10
Views
4K
What Does Negative Potential Energy Indicate in Colliding Iron Balls in Space?
Replies
7
Views
2K
B The physics of flywheel launchers (like tennis ball shooters)
2
Replies
60
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top