Equipotential Surface: Kinetic Energy & Variability

AI Thread Summary
The kinetic energy of a particle moving on an equipotential surface remains constant due to the conservation of energy principle, where kinetic energy (KE) and potential energy (PE) sum to a constant value. Since the potential energy is constant on such surfaces, the kinetic energy must also remain constant. However, if the particle is not constrained to the equipotential surface or if the surface is curved, it may deviate from that path, potentially affecting its kinetic energy. The analogy of a pool table illustrates this concept well. Overall, the kinetic energy is constant as long as the particle remains on the equipotential surface.
saravanan13
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
What is the kinetic energy of particle moving in a equipotential surface?
Whether is it constant or variable?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hi saravanan13! :smile:

you mean, like a pooltable?

KE + PE = constant, so if the potential energy is constant then the kinetic energy must be constant also

(though if it's not constrained to stay on the equipotential surface, and if that surface is curved, it will probably move off it :wink:)
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
773
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top