Gravitational potential energy - problem

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around gravitational potential energy, specifically its definition and implications when moving a mass within a gravitational field. Participants are exploring the relationship between gravitational force and potential energy, particularly in the context of moving a mass from a distance to infinity and vice versa.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the definition of gravitational potential energy and its calculation, particularly regarding the sign convention and whether a gain in height corresponds to a positive change in potential energy. There are discussions about the integration of gravitational force and the implications of negative values in potential energy calculations.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants expressing confusion about the definitions and calculations related to gravitational potential energy. Some guidance has been offered regarding the integration of forces and the interpretation of work done on the object, but there is no explicit consensus on the definitions or the implications of the negative values encountered.

Contextual Notes

Participants are referencing various sources, including Wikipedia and personal experiences, to clarify their understanding. There is a noted skepticism about the usefulness of certain definitions and the potential to ignore gravitational potential energy in problem-solving.

zinc79
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hello. I'm new. I was looking around on the web a bit to find an answer to my problem, and I came across these forums.

Gravitational force = -GMm/(r^2)

Gravitational force between a small mass (m) and the Earth (M) is zero at a distance of infinity. Any distance smaller than infinity gives a negative value. When the distance is minimum, the force is mathematically minimum but actually the largest in magnitude. When the distance is infinite, the force is mathematically largest but actually the least in magnitude.

But what is gravitational potential energy? Is it work done due to gravitational force in moving a mass from a distance (r) to an infinite distance? Is it work done due to gravitational force in moving a mass from a an infinite distance to a distance (r)? Or is it simply the work done due to gravitational force in moving the mass from one point to another?

Now, I'll deal with a case when I move a mass (m) from a distance (r1) to an infinite distance from the Earth (r2)

The gravitational potential energy, as I have learnt, is simply the integration the the gravitational force. This comes out as GMm[(1/r2) - (1/r1)]. This is where I have the problem. If the mass gains height, i.e. moves away from the earth, then r1 is small and r2 is large, and because of this the gravitational potential energy turns out negative! Isn't it supposed to be a GAIN in potential energy? Isn't the change supposed to give a positive value? If not, then why? Work is being done ON the object to raise it, right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Gravitational potential energy is the energy something has because of it's position in a graviy field. The change is simply the change from it's original position - the total GPE would be compared to it's potential at an infinite distance but that isn't usually very useful.

The negative sign in the force is beacuse it is attractive, you have to be a little careful with the sign conventiona, see-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_potential_energy#Gravitational_potential_energy
 
zinc79 said:
The gravitational potential energy, as I have learnt, is simply the integration the the gravitational force. This comes out as GMm[(1/r2) - (1/r1)]. This is where I have the problem. If the mass gains height, i.e. moves away from the earth, then r1 is small and r2 is large, and because of this the gravitational potential energy turns out negative! Isn't it supposed to be a GAIN in potential energy? Isn't the change supposed to give a positive value? If not, then why? Work is being done ON the object to raise it, right?
Careful. To calculate the change in gravitational PE you must integrate the force needed to lift the object over the distance r1 to r2. That force is upward and equals +GMm/(r^2). So if you calculate the work done by that force, which is the work done ON the object, you'll find that the change in gravitational PE in raising a mass will be positive, as you suspect.
 


I get you Doc Al, but wikipedia says that "Gravitational potential energy is the work of gravitational force", and well, it is a popular source... I'm still confused...
 
I wouldn't lean too heavily upon wiki as a source. Don't you have a textbook? Here's a reliable discussion of gravitational PE: Gravitational Potential Energy.
 
zinc79 said:
But what is gravitational potential energy? Is it work done due to gravitational force in moving a mass from a distance (r) to an infinite distance? Is it work done due to gravitational force in moving a mass from a an infinite distance to a distance (r)? Or is it simply the work done due to gravitational force in moving the mass from one point to another?

from my personal expierence it's all just nonsense. It really doesn't mean anything. Because they analyze lot of problems with gravitational force in them, so they name the work done by gravitational force "gravitional potential enery".

Yes, it is work done due to gravitational force while moving an object from A to B.

Edit: While solving your problems, ignoring gravitational potential energy may help you (it always helped me!)
 
zinc79 said:
because of this the gravitational potential energy turns out negative! Isn't it supposed to be a GAIN in potential energy? Isn't the change supposed to give a positive value? If not, then why? Work is being done ON the object to raise it, right?


oops, i missed this part :redface:

see the potential curve well( that would explain why it's more negative)

Yes, work is being done on the object to raise it,
but assuming that the object had some initial v at the start,
then after reaching the height the v would be reduced..

and so the system is losing its kinetic energy..
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K