How to decide the sign of a potential

  • Thread starter Thread starter laharl88
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Potential Sign
AI Thread Summary
Determining the sign of a potential in rational mechanics involves understanding that each term in the potential function has its own sign, independent of others. When dealing with forces like gravity and spring forces, the potential energy associated with each force must reflect the direction of the force it represents. For example, while gravitational potential energy is typically positive, the potential due to centrifugal force in a rotating system is negative, as it acts outward. The key takeaway is that potential energy must increase in the direction opposite to the force. Understanding these principles is crucial for accurately analyzing stability and equilibrium in mechanical systems.
laharl88
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hi! I'm a new user of this forum, although I've been reading a few threads for a while...
Mi question is this: in rational mechanics, how do i decide the sign of a potential?
Let me explain better: in some exercises it may happen that a mass particle is subject to both gravity and, for example, the force of a spring. If by hypothesis, the two forces are always perpendicular, how should i write the potential?

V= mgy -1/2*k*x^2 or V=mgy + 1/2*k*x^2

Let me underline that this question is not trivial! In fact that mere sign can change everything, including the stability of equilibria points!
I'd be really grateful to anyone who can answer this question.
If i wasn't clear in explaining my doubts, please fell free to tell me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In the case of spring PE, x is displacement from the unstretched position and the PE is 1/2kx² not -1/2kx².
 
I know that, i just want to know if the two potentials must have the same sign, or the opposite sign. Suppose, instead of a spring, the plane in which the motion happens to rotate with a constant w. In this case there would be a potential, due to the centrifugal force, given by
V1= 1/2*m*w^2*x^2
In this case, do the two potentials have the same sign or the opposite?
By the way, thanks for answering :)
 
laharl88 said:
I know that, i just want to know if the two potentials must have the same sign, or the opposite sign.
I guess I don't understand your question then. Each term in the potential has its own sign, independent of the other terms.

Suppose, instead of a spring, the plane in which the motion happens to rotate with a constant w. In this case there would be a potential, due to the centrifugal force, given by
V1= 1/2*m*w^2*x^2
Since the centrifugal force is outward, that potential must be negative, assuming x is the distance from the center: V = -1/2mω²x²
 
Just think of the force that the potential represents. The potential must always increase in the direction opposite the force.
 
Doc Al said:
I guess I don't understand your question then. Each term in the potential has its own sign, independent of the other terms.


Since the centrifugal force is outward, that potential must be negative, assuming x is the distance from the center: V = -1/2mω²x²

DaleSpam said:
Just think of the force that the potential represents. The potential must always increase in the direction opposite the force.

Ok,i think i understand now, thanks a lot guys :)
 

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

I Change of coordinates in a potential energy field
Replies
2
Views
1K
Understanding the derivation for Elastic Potential Energy.
Replies
2
Views
2K
I Why Does the Negative Sign Appear in the Vector Potential Equation?
Replies
3
Views
1K
I Work-Energy Theorem for Moving Block and Spring System?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Why does the potential of A decrease when plate B is nearby?
Replies
2
Views
2K
How to obtain correct negative sign in calculation of motional emf?
Replies
2
Views
893
Harmonic potential exercise with perturbation theory
Replies
2
Views
2K
Physical interpretation of the "total potential energy"
Replies
20
Views
8K
Integral for work done leading to potential energy sign confusion
Replies
5
Views
2K
B Conceptually understanding change in potential energy with 0 net work
Replies
9
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top