Help with Kinetic/Potential Energy problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter apollo11cdr
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem involving kinetic and potential energy, specifically related to a stone fired at a certain speed and its energy states at maximum height. Participants are exploring the relationship between kinetic energy, potential energy, and the conservation of energy principles.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to apply conservation of energy to relate kinetic and potential energy at different points in the stone's trajectory. Questions arise regarding the interpretation of kinetic energy at maximum height and the implications of energy conservation.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the conservation of mechanical energy and questioning the assumptions made about kinetic energy at maximum height. Some guidance has been offered regarding the relationship between kinetic and potential energy, but no consensus has been reached on the specific calculations or interpretations.

Contextual Notes

There is some confusion regarding the values of kinetic energy at different points and the assumptions about potential energy. Participants are also navigating the implications of projectile motion and the effects of gravity on energy states.

apollo11cdr
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Help with Kinetic/Potential Energy problem !

Homework Statement



Can anyone help me solve a problem. ??

A stone weighing 0.62 kg is fired from point a at 5.5 m s-1 , at point b mid range (Maximum height) it has 2.3 joules kinetc energy.. what is the height of the stone at point b ?

b]2. Homework Equations [/b]

mg h = half mv squared

h = v2/2g

The Attempt at a Solution




h = 30.25 m s -1 / 2 x 9.8 ms -2

That is the only solution I can think of !

anyone suggest another way to solve this ?

Thanks

A11cdr
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How did you come to that "solution"?

Forget the formulae for a moment. How would you apply the conservation of energy to this problem?
 
Looking thru the problem that was the only equation that came to mind...

With the stone at its maximum height I don't understand why it has a KE of 2.3 joules ! unless perhaps that is proportional to its initial KE.

Baffled...
 
apollo11cdr said:
With the stone at its maximum height I don't understand why it has a KE of 2.3 joules ! unless perhaps that is proportional to its initial KE.

Baffled...

I'm the one baffled at the moment. :wink:

Conservation of (mechanical) energy: In the absence of dissipative forces, the sum of kinetic and potential energies of a system is always a constant. Here your "system" is the stone.

Apply this principle to the problem.
 
Thank you.. I will read up on that topic !

Im sorry to have confused you !
 
How about initial kinetic energy / 9.8 n

9.4 J / 9.8 n = 0.959m or 1m

I think the 2.3 joules at the point B (maximum height) is just a decrease of KE before it becomes PE.. can't understand why it quoted really other than KE can never be negative it is a product of definite quantities or something ?

Am I getting warm ?
 
Take the point from which the stone was fired as zero P.E (well, this could be anything, but we choose zero for convenience). At the same point the stone also has some K.E. Now, the sum P.E + K.E is a constant, say C.

PE + KE = C, and in whatever way the KE and PE change, their sum remains C, at all times (this is assuming that there is no air resistance or friction involved). You can find what this C is when the stone is fired. Now when it is at the top, the KE has changed, and so has the PE, but as stated earlier, their sum remains what it was when the stone was fired.

Can you do the problem now?
 
apollo11cdr said:
I think the 2.3 joules at the point B (maximum height) is just a decrease of KE before it becomes PE

.. can't understand why it quoted really other than KE can never be negative it is a product of definite quantities or something ?


Generally, it is not necessary that the energy should be completely PE (or completely KE) at some point. What you have is projectile motion; unless the stone was shot straight up, the KE at the top will not be zero. Remember, there is still the horizontal component of the initial velocity at the top.
 
Still trying :-)

I have used equation for Initial KE which gives me a total of 9.4 Joules.
So I presume that is the figure that will be the total KE + PE... the constant

I am lost when it comes to the object having 2.3 joules at the middle of the curve... as it is not zero.. I am puzzled ...

KE = 2.3 J at point B , so PE must equal 7.1 Joules if energy is constant... but I can't seem to find the right equation to establish the height of the stone mid range... could be 7.1 J / gravity 9.8 N ?

I must thank you for your help !
 
  • #10
apollo11cdr said:
Still trying :-)

I have used equation for Initial KE which gives me a total of 9.4 Joules.
So I presume that is the figure that will be the total KE + PE... the constant

That's right.

I am lost when it comes to the object having 2.3 joules at the middle of the curve... as it is not zero.. I am puzzled ...

Why should it be zero? Did you read my last post?

KE = 2.3 J at point B , so PE must equal 7.1 Joules if energy is constant...
Right again.

but I can't seem to find the right equation to establish the height of the stone mid range... could be 7.1 J / gravity 9.8 N ?

I think you've mixed up numbers and units somehow. The PE (at a height h, which is small compared to the radius of the earth) is mgh.
 
  • #11
Thread moved from Advanced Physics to Introductory Physics.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K