Gravitational Potential Energy of a particle

AI Thread Summary
Gravitational potential energy is defined as U = -GMm/R, and while one might consider attributing half of this energy to each particle, it is more accurate to view it as an interaction energy belonging to the pair rather than to the individual particles. This distinction is important as it reflects the nature of gravitational interactions, which differ from electric energy in terms of identification and measurement. General relativity further complicates the understanding of gravitational energy, indicating that it cannot be treated in the same way as electric energy. The discussion emphasizes the collective nature of gravitational potential energy rather than individual attribution. Understanding these concepts is crucial for a proper grasp of gravitational interactions.
makyol
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Hi there,

As we know gravitational potential energy is U = -GMm/R right? Here is what i obsessed, in case for the each particle can we say half of this energy belongs to one particle? I hope my question is clear enough:)

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Um... well, I guess you could say that if you wanted to, but generally there isn't any reason to do so, and it could even be misleading. The gravitational potential energy is an interaction energy, so it really belongs to the pair, not to the particles individually. The old adage about the whole being more than the sum of its parts really applies here.
 
Hi.
As for electric energy, similar inverse r case, we can identify where and how much there are. But general relativity theory says it is not so for gravitational energy.
Regards.
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

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?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

Gravitational potential energy question -- Ojbect sitting on the Earth
Replies
3
Views
1K
I How to interpret this definition of potential energy?
Replies
10
Views
2K
How to relate the gravitational potential energy zero to the axes?
Replies
4
Views
2K
I Maximum impact parameter given effective potential
Replies
4
Views
2K
I Change of coordinates in a potential energy field
Replies
2
Views
1K
Gravitational potential between two massive particles....
Replies
4
Views
2K
Gravitational potential energy formulas
Replies
2
Views
1K
Two separate "gravitational potential energy" equations?
Replies
11
Views
3K
I Tong Dynamics: cannot cancel angle from orbit energy expression calculation
Replies
2
Views
1K
Conservative forces, Nonconservative forces and Potential Energy
Replies
9
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top