GPE and Escape Velocity: Understanding the Relationship for Moving Objects

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between gravitational potential energy (GPE) and the ease of moving objects, particularly in contexts not involving orbits. Participants explore whether an increase in GPE, due to height or mass, affects the difficulty of moving an object.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether kinetic energy must exceed GPE for an object to be moved, suggesting that an object can be moved even with zero kinetic energy if it has nonzero GPE.
  • There are claims that increasing an object's GPE by raising its height does not necessarily make it harder to move, as inertia is not affected by GPE.
  • One participant proposes that increasing GPE by height makes it harder to move an object, while others counter that this is not the case without considering other factors like friction.
  • Participants discuss specific examples, such as lifting an object from different heights, and whether the change in gravitational force at different heights affects the effort required to move the object.
  • Some participants clarify that GPE can be altered by changing the reference level, which does not involve physical changes to the system.
  • A later reply introduces the concept of GPE being a negative value and discusses the implications of changing orbital radius in terms of energy requirements.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between GPE and the ease of moving objects. There is no consensus on whether increasing GPE makes it harder to move an object, as various factors are considered, and some participants challenge each other's examples and reasoning.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of the relationship between GPE and kinetic energy, suggesting that assumptions about inertia and gravitational force need to be clarified. The discussion includes varying interpretations of how GPE is affected by height and mass.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying physics concepts related to energy, motion, and gravitational forces, particularly in understanding the nuances of potential energy and its implications in different scenarios.

ahmed emad
Messages
43
Reaction score
2
Is it necessary to be the kinetic energy greater than gpe to move ( I don't talk about in orbits)
Example :
Is it will be harder to move an object has a bigger gpe ( same mass but bigger height from ground).
And thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ahmed emad said:
Is it necessary to be the kinetic energy greater than gpe to move ( I don't talk about in orbits)
Example :
Is it will be harder to move an object has a bigger gpe ( same mass but bigger height from ground).
And thanks.
Sorry, but your post does not parse or translate very well. Can you give a practical example of your question with lots of details and maybe a sketch? Thanks.
 
I meant if I increased the gravitational potential energy of object will it be harder to move?
 
ahmed emad said:
I meant if I increased the gravitational potential energy of object will it be harder to move?
Well, that clears everything up!

Just kidding. You did not address my response -- more details, a sketch, etc.

if you increase the GPE of an object on a table by increasing its mass (by pouring more water into a jug), then it gets harder to move sideways on the table due to the increase in the friction between the table and the jug.

If you increase the GPE of the space station by moving it to a slightly higher orbit, and then fire the thrusters to move it sideways in orbit, then no, it takes no more fuel to execute the maneuver.

See? More details and example about your question would help us to help you with your conceptual question.
 
Increase Gravitational potential energy by the distance from ground not mass
 
If machine lift object where it in 2 meters from ground will be easier than lift it from 5 meters from ground
 
ahmed emad said:
Is it will be harder to move an object has a bigger gpe ( same mass but bigger height from ground).
ahmed emad said:
Increase Gravitational potential energy by the distance from ground not mass
Then my space station example would seem to apply, no? What is motivating your question? Is there something you have seen in your reading and studying that makes you think otherwise?
 
No I just was thinking about it
 
I will try to make it clear , you have a plane and in time 1 the gpe of it was 20 and in time 2 gpe was 70 because the distance from ground increased , is the plane will be harder to move at time 2 more than time 1?
 
  • #10
ahmed emad said:
No I just was thinking about it

Fair enough. Asking questions is a good way to learn. Did my space station example make sense?
 
  • #11
Unfortunately no.
 
  • #12
ahmed emad said:
I will try to make it clear , you have a plane and in time 1 the gpe of it was 20 and in time 2 gpe was 70 because the distance from ground increased , is the plane will be harder to move at time 2 more than time 1?
Bad example. To increase the plane's GPE without increasing its weight, you need to increase its altitude. What 2 effects does that have on it's ability to change its KE? That's a much more complex example, not simplified. Do you see why?
 
  • #13
So KE of plane not have a relation with GPE?
 
  • #14
ahmed emad said:
Is it necessary to be the kinetic energy greater than gpe to move

No. An obvious counterexample is an object sitting at rest on Earth. It has zero kinetic energy but nonzero gravitational potential energy; but it can be moved.

ahmed emad said:
if I increased the gravitational potential energy of object will it be harder to move?

Not for that reason, no. See below.

An underlying confusion you might have is that you might be thinking that increasing an object's gravitational potential energy increases its inertia. It doesn't.

ahmed emad said:
If machine lift object where it in 2 meters from ground will be easier than lift it from 5 meters from ground

If you mean, lift vertically, then there is a very, very tiny difference, yes, but it's not due to the change in gravitational potential energy; it's due to the very, very tiny decrease in the force of gravity when you go from 2 meters above ground to 5 meters above ground.
 
  • #15
I meant increase gpe without changing the force of gravity
 
  • #16
ahmed emad said:
I meant increase gpe without changing the force of gravity

You can't. To increase your GPE, you have to change either your height, or the mass of the planet you're sitting on. Either one changes the force of gravity.
 
  • #17
Ok thank you very very much for your help and Excuse me for my sins
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
  • #18
You're welcome!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
  • #19
Note that GPE is normally a negative number, using infinity as a reference distance where GPE equals 0. Increasing GPE makes it less negative, and assuming a point source or it's equivalent for gravity, then the force of gravity decreases as GPE increases.

If in a circular orbit, and the goal is to establish a new circular orbit with an increased radius and increased GPE, which optimally takes two bursts of energy to change the velocity, the maximum requirement occurs at a specific ratio of orbital radius:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hohmann_transfer_orbit#Worst_case.2C_maximum_delta-v
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ahmed emad
  • #20
You can change the GPE by just choosing another reference level. Which means by doing nothing to the system. The GPE value is not relevant. Only changes in GPE are meaningful.
 
  • #21
ahmed emad said:
If machine lift object where it in 2 meters from ground will be easier than lift it from 5 meters from ground
No: f=ma does not include a term for GPE.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K