Energy Conservation and Escape Velocity

AI Thread Summary
When a particle is launched away from a mass, its kinetic energy decreases while its potential energy, which is negative, also decreases in magnitude. The conservation of energy principle applies, indicating that the total energy remains constant, but the kinetic and potential energies convert into one another. As the particle moves away, potential energy approaches zero, while kinetic energy diminishes correspondingly. The analogy of debt illustrates that as potential energy becomes less negative, it equates to a gain in energy. The discussion emphasizes understanding energy conservation in terms of energy transformations rather than absolute values.
Gilgalad
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
If a particle is launched with kinetic energy as it gets further from the mass (eg a planet) the kinetic energy decreases. However Potential Energy GMm/r also decreases the further you get from the mass. Where does all this energy go? :confused:

Granted, the calculation U + K = 0 does give an answer that I have seen all over the place for escape velocity but I always thought energy is conserved and we have initial kinetic and potential energy but no final energy. I was wondering if energy is a vector quantity and there is no resultant energy.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It is negative potential energy that decreases in the escape velocity example, whereas kinetic energy is always a non-negative quantity.
Hence, in the escape velocity example, potential energy increases up to zero level as kinetic energy decreases to zero level.
 
I unterstand that potential energy is negative but I thought that was just convention. The size of the number is decreasing as you move away from a planet. So is the energy still not getting less as you move away?
 
Gilgalad said:
I unterstand that potential energy is negative but I thought that was just convention. The size of the number is decreasing as you move away from a planet. So is the energy still not getting less as you move away?

Try thinking about it in terms of a debt. As the magnitude of your debt decreases, it is the same as gaining money.
 
I think I get it now. Newton only put it negatively inversely proportional to the radius (squared in force equation) because that is the rate it increases at. So if you plot -1/r (for symplicity) for PE as well as a 1/r for KE and translate PE up by an infinate amount so both graphs are in the top right quadrant except for when PE goes off to infinity down the y-axis the total of both energies at any certain radius is constant.

Also where the two graphs cross is that the the distance you need to get to to have enough KE to overcome the PE?
 
What do you mean by that KE is to overcome PE?
I'm not sure I understand..
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top