Getting the Potential Energy from a Conservative Force

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining whether a given force is conservative and, if so, finding the potential energy associated with that force. The force is represented as F = k(x, 2y, 3z).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to verify the conservativeness of the force by checking the curl and expresses confusion about setting up the integral for potential energy. Some participants suggest using partial differential equations to approach the problem.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring different methods to express the potential energy function and discussing the implications of arbitrary constants in the integration process. There is a recognition of the need to evaluate functions of multiple variables and to solve equations simultaneously.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of needing to integrate with respect to multiple variables and the challenge of determining the appropriate form for the potential energy function. The discussion includes considerations about constants of integration and their dependencies on other variables.

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



([itex]\nabla[/itex] 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
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K