Getting the Potential Energy from a Conservative Force

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on determining the potential energy from a conservative force represented by the vector field F = k(x, 2y, 3z). It is established that the force is conservative since the curl of F is zero. The potential energy U is derived through integration, leading to the expression U = -k[(1/2)x² + y² + (3/2)z²], with the understanding that arbitrary constants can be included for each variable. The participants emphasize the importance of treating the integration constants as functions of the other variables involved.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus, specifically curl and gradient operations.
  • Familiarity with conservative forces and potential energy concepts.
  • Knowledge of partial differential equations and their solutions.
  • Proficiency in integration techniques in multivariable calculus.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of conservative vector fields in physics.
  • Learn how to compute the curl and gradient of vector fields in three dimensions.
  • Explore the method of integrating multivariable functions to find potential energy.
  • Investigate the role of arbitrary constants in potential energy functions and their implications.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those studying mechanics and vector calculus, as well as educators looking to enhance their understanding of conservative forces and potential energy calculations.

Trade
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The problem basically asked me to check if a given force was conservative and if it was conservative, also find the potential energy.

F = k(x,2y,3z)

Homework Equations



(\nabla X F) = Curl of F
U = Integral of F

3. attempt

So the force is clearly conservative as the curl is equal to zero. I know that I basically need to take the integral of the force, but I'm a bit confused as to how to set up an integral given how the force was given, or even what to integrate with respect to. Any point in the right direction would be awesome. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Set it up as a partial DE that you have to solve.

$$\vec{F}=-\vec{\nabla} U$$
 
Simon Bridge said:
Set it up as a partial DE that you have to solve.

$$\vec{F}=-\vec{\nabla} U$$
Okay, so I end up with something along the lines of...

K [x, 2y, 3z] = - [dU/dx, dU/dy, dU/dz]

and then we integrate

U = -k [ (1/2)x2, y2,(3/2)z2]
Would it be proper to add a constant at the end of each part, noting that it's terms of the other two variables? Something like

U = -k [ (1/2)x2 + Cy,z, y2 + Cx,z , (3/2)z2 + Cx,y]EDIT:

I think I'm being silly. I should just put all the components together right? So that the other components are the Constant for each other right? So it looks like

U = -k [ (1/2)x2 + y2+ (3/2)z2 ]
 
Last edited:
You should end up with just one arbitrary constant.

i.e. You need to evaluate cy,z etc.
That means solving as simultaneous equations or go back and solve the DEs one at a time instead of all in one go.

##F_x=kx=-\frac{\partial}{\partial x}U(x,y,z)\\ \qquad \Rightarrow U(x,y,z)=-\frac{1}{2}kx^2+c(y,z)##

... i.e. c(y,z) is a function of y and z alone.

##F_y = 2ky=-\frac{\partial}{\partial y}U(x,y,z) = -\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\big(-\frac{1}{2}kx^2+c(y,z)\big) = -\frac{\partial}{\partial y}c(y,z)\\ \qquad \Rightarrow c(y,z)=\cdots +d(z) \\ \qquad \qquad \Rightarrow U(x,y,z)=\cdots##

... you should be able to complete it from here.
 
Awesome, I think I have it from here. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K