Gravitational potential energy question -- Ojbect sitting on the Earth

AI Thread Summary
Gravitational potential energy is a property of the system comprising both the object and the Earth, not just the object alone. When considering the object as a single system, its potential energy does not change when it is dropped; instead, the energy transfer occurs due to the work done by Earth's gravity. The potential energy of the system changes when the Earth is moved away, indicating that potential energy is not solely associated with the object. The correct expression for energy conservation in this context includes both the object and the Earth, reflecting their interdependent relationship. Ultimately, the potential energy belongs to the Earth-object system, emphasizing the need for careful consideration when defining systems in physics.
Vash25
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Good day,

If I consider my system to be an object and the earth, and the object is on the surface of the earth, then the system will have gravitational potential energy. Why couldn't I say that only the object (considering it as my system) has gravitational potential energy?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Vash25 said:
If I consider my system to be an object and the earth, and the object is on the surface of the earth, then the system will have gravitational potential energy. Why couldn't I say that only the object (considering it as my system) has gravitational potential energy?
We often say this as an short hand, when the object is much less massive than the Earth, so when it's released the potential energy of Earth & object goes almost exclusively into the object's kinetic energy.
 
  • Like
Likes cianfa72 and Vash25
Vash25 said:
Why couldn't I say that only the object (considering it as my system) has gravitational potential energy?
Leave the object where it is and move the Earth away. The object is unchanged but the potential energy changes. Therefore the potential energy does not belong to the object.
 
Vash25 said:
Why couldn't I say that only the object (considering it as my system) has gravitational potential energy?
If you could say that, then you would be equally justified to say that the Earth (when considered as your system) will have the potential energy and not the object. So which is it that "has" the potential energy, the object or the Earth? The answer is neither, the potential energy belongs to the two-component Earth-object system. When the common potential energy changes, so does the kinetic energy of the system's components. The correct mechanical energy conservation to write in this case is (subscripts o = object and E = Earth) $$\Delta K_{\text{o}}+\Delta K_{\text{E}}+\Delta U_{\text{o+E}}=0.$$It's only because the Earth's vertical speed does not change noticeably over the time that the object falls, that we ignore the Earth's change in kinetic energy as commented by @A.T.

You can separate the two and consider the object as a single-component system, but you have to be careful of what you say and how. If you drop the object when it alone is your system, it does not lose potential energy and gain kinetic energy as sometimes is the claim. The dropped object gains kinetic energy because the Earth does positive work on it through the force of gravity. This positive work is equal to the loss of potential energy of the two-component system. To summarize, you can think of the transfer of energy to the object as taking place internally in the two-component system and externally in the single-component system.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Likes cianfa72, Vash25, vanhees71 and 1 other person
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...
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?
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...
Back
Top