Gravitation Potential Energy -- Questions about calculating the sign of GPE

AI Thread Summary
Gravitational potential energy (GPE) is context-dependent, with its sign determined by the chosen reference point for zero potential. When calculating changes in GPE, the formula mghf - mg0 indicates the signed change, while mgh0 - mghf shows the loss in potential energy. Generally, GPE is considered negative when using the convention that potential at infinity is zero. As an object rises, its GPE becomes less negative, indicating a positive change in energy. Understanding these principles clarifies the calculations and interpretations of gravitational potential energy.
Quantum Psi Inverted
Messages
7
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
When does one use mgh0-mghf, and when does one use mghf-mg0? Is all gravitation potential energy necessarily negative?
Relevant Equations
E=(m/2)(vf^2-v0^2)+mg(hf-h0)
PE=mg(h0-hf)
I believe that this is due to context of application, but now, I'm starting to doubt myself. For example, a helicopter lifting itself has positive PE change. I really don't intuitively understand how this works. Can someone kindly explain this to me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Relative to the ground, GPE (gravitational potential energy) is always positive. A change in GPE can be positve or negative.
 
Quantum Psi Inverted said:
Homework Statement: When does one use mgh0-mghf, and when does one use mghf-mg0? Is all gravitation potential energy necessarily negative?
Those are two different questions.

Assuming the 0 and f are supposed to indicate initial and final heights, mghf-mg0 gives you the (signed) change in PE. mgh0-mghf gives you the loss in PE, obviously.

All "potentials" are in principle relative, i.e. it is up to you to choose where the zero potential is. However, a convention commonly used, both for GPE and electrostatic, is that the potential at infinity is zero. That makes all other GPEs negative.
At a greater height, the potential is less negative, so is greater than at a lower height.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Thread 'A bead-mass oscillatory system problem'
I can't figure out how to find the velocity of the particle at 37 degrees. Basically the bead moves with velocity towards right let's call it v1. The particle moves with some velocity v2. In frame of the bead, the particle is performing circular motion. So v of particle wrt bead would be perpendicular to the string. But how would I find the velocity of particle in ground frame? I tried using vectors to figure it out and the angle is coming out to be extremely long. One equation is by work...
Back
Top