Gravitational Potential Energy

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of Gravitational Potential Energy (GPE) and its classification as a renewable energy source. Participants explore the implications of GPE within the framework of energy conservation and the rules governing energy boundaries in physical systems.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that GPE could be considered a renewable energy input source, questioning the rules of energy boundaries that define what can be classified as energy input.
  • Another participant counters that GPE cannot serve as a continuous source of power, likening it to a spring that, once used, requires an external energy source to recharge.
  • Some participants suggest that GPE can be utilized in renewable energy applications, such as hydroelectric dams, where the potential energy of water is harnessed as it flows downhill.
  • A participant expresses a desire to define GPE as an energy input under certain conditions, seeking clarity on the constraints imposed by the laws of physics.
  • Another participant emphasizes that GPE is an energy capacity rather than an energy input, invoking the principle of conservation of energy as a potential limitation.
  • There is a discussion about the need for clear definitions and rules regarding GPE, especially in the context of renewable energy presentations and the operational logic of systems utilizing GPE.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the classification of GPE as an energy input. Some argue that it can be viewed as renewable under specific conditions, while others maintain that it is fundamentally an energy capacity governed by conservation laws. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the specific rules governing energy boundaries and the implications of defining GPE as an energy input. There are references to classical physics and a desire for rules akin to quantum mechanics, indicating a need for more precise definitions in the context of energy discussions.

zeoblade
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I want to propose that Gravitational Potential Energy (GPE) is a renewable energy input source but I feel maybe GPE might not be accepted as part of the surroundings acting upon the energy boundary of a system.

What are the rules of the energy boundary that umpire what is allowed and disallowed? If you know a reliable textbook or article, please let me know
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

The concept you need to look into is conservation of energy. Just like with a spring, GPE can't be a continuous source of power: use it once and it's gone unless you use some other source of energy to recharge it.
 
But it could be a renewable source, depending on what you're actually talking about. Gravitational Potential Energy is a bit general and we already take advantage of that principle in some forms.

Hydroelectric dams, for example. You're taking advantage of the change in potential energy of water when it's transported to high elevations by snow and rain and then flows downhill again in the rivers.

The trick is to have some naturally occurring cycle that you can take advantage of since transporting it to a higher gravitational potential energy level yourself would use up more energy than you reap when it comes back down (due to the inefficiency of our means - if we had perfectly efficient machines, we would break even instead of lose on the deal).
 
I want to use a larger opposing GPE to renew the expended GPE so my energy input is GPE. I can't find any energy boundary rules that forbid me from using GPE as an energy input
 
Again,(worded differently...) GPE is not an energy input, it is an energy capacity. So the rule you appear to be breaking is conservation of energy.
 
if i can describe my process in a way that is within the constraints of conservation of energy, may i ever define GPE as energy input?

in other words, as long as i am within the laws of physics that govern this universe, can i ever describe a process with GPE as energy input?

are there no energy boundary rules except the rules of classical physics?

i am wanting some rules like quantum mechanic selection rules, rules that umpire fair play

my superior will present about renewable energy and there is a lot of angst in what label we must use just for completeness. with all the trouble just for a label/name, maybe it is better to invite experts to investigate and discuss the matter after the machine is mass manufactured and deployed. then we all can contribute to accurately define a label as time progresses where there is no time constraint

this way the system can be accurately described to everyone because its operational logic is really important to see how the GPE is renewed

GPE can be equated by displacement of force, so I want to say Gravitational Force displacement (GFd) because F = ma = mg and multiplied by displacement GFd has units kg.m2.s-2 = N.m = Joules of energy
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
11K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
638
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K