How to find the energy of an object that was at rest?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves two rockets, one in motion and the other at rest, with their motors connected for a brief period. They expel the same mass of gas at the same speed relative to themselves. The kinetic energy of the moving rocket increases by 4%, and the task is to determine the energy of the stationary rocket.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the relationship between the change in speed of the rocket and the mass and speed of the exhaust. There are attempts to apply conservation laws, particularly momentum conservation, to analyze the situation. Questions arise about the implications of the kinetic energy increase and how it relates to momentum changes.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring various interpretations of momentum conservation and its application to the problem. Some guidance has been provided regarding the relationship between the rockets and their exhaust, but no consensus has been reached on the final approach to the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of the problem due to the unknown energy input from combustion and the need to clarify the definitions of momentum and kinetic energy in the context of the two rockets.

  • #31
haruspex said:
No, 1.0198 would not be abbreviated to 1.012.
Then what would it be?
haruspex said:
and even if it were, subtracting 1 does not yield 0.12.
Yes sorry, I meant 0.012.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Davidllerenav said:
Then what would it be?
You will kick yourself when you realize the error you are making.
Repeatedly increment the final nonzero digit of 1.0198 until there are only two decimal places.
 
  • #33
haruspex said:
Repeatedly increment the final nonzero digit of 1.0198 until there are only two decimal places.
Oh, I think I see it know, would it be 1.02?
 
  • #34
Davidllerenav said:
Oh, I think I see it know, would it be 1.02?
Yes.
 
  • #35
haruspex said:
Yes.
So ##\Delta v=0.02## and the kinetic energy of the second rocket, the one that was at rest is ##E_k=m\Delta v^2= m(0.02)^2v_0^2##? Is t right?
 
  • #36
Davidllerenav said:
Ek=mΔv2
Not quite... you forgot a factor.
 
  • #37
haruspex said:
Not quite... you forgot a factor.
Oh, yes the ##\frac{1}{2}##, so it is ##E_k=\frac{1}{2}m\Delta v##.
 
  • #38
Davidllerenav said:
Oh, yes the ##\frac{1}{2}##, so it is ##E_k=\frac{1}{2}m\Delta v##.
Now you forgot the square.
 
  • #39
haruspex said:
Now you forgot the square.
Sorry... ##E_k=\frac{1}{2}m(\Delta v)^2= \frac{1}{2}m(0.02)^2v_0^2=\frac{1}{2}m(0.004)v_0^2##. It think it is correct know.
 
  • #40
Davidllerenav said:
Sorry... ##E_k=\frac{1}{2}m(\Delta v)^2= \frac{1}{2}m(0.02)^2v_0^2=\frac{1}{2}m(0.004)v_0^2##. It think it is correct know.
I'm sorry to say that's another arithmetic error.
 
  • #41
haruspex said:
I'm sorry to say that's another arithmetic error.
I see, I made a mistake when I squared 0.02, it is 0.0004, not 0.004. so ##E_k=\frac{1}{2}m(0.0004)v_0^2.
 
  • #42
Davidllerenav said:
I see, I made a mistake when I squared 0.02, it is 0.0004, not 0.004. so ##E_k=\frac{1}{2}m(0.0004)v_0^2##.
Right. And you can simplify slightly combining the 1/2 with the 4.
 
  • #43
haruspex said:
Right. And you can simplify slightly combining the 1/2 with the 4.
Yes, so simplifying I end up with ##E_k=m(0.0002)v_0^2##. And that's all, right?
 
  • #44
Davidllerenav said:
Yes, so simplifying I end up with ##E_k=m(0.0002)v_0^2##. And that's all, right?
Perfect.
 
  • #45
haruspex said:
Perfect.
Ok, thanks. I don't need to write the equations of the momentum of both rocket, do I?
 
  • #46
Davidllerenav said:
Ok, thanks. I don't need to write the equations of the momentum of both rocket, do I?
No, you already used that.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Davidllerenav
  • #47
haruspex said:
No, you already used that.
Ok, thank you so much for your help.
 
  • #48
Davidllerenav said:
Yes, so simplifying I end up with ##E_k=m(0.0002)v_0^2##. And that's all, right?
There is a problem with this result. Neither ##m## nor ##v_0## are given in the problem description. Instead, what is given is ##E_0##, the initial energy of the moving rocket.

Can you express the result you have in terms of ##E_0## rather than in terms of ##m## and ##v_0##?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: haruspex
  • #49
jbriggs444 said:
There is a problem with this result. Neither ##m## nor ##v_0## are given in the problem description. Instead, what is given is ##E_0##, the initial energy of the moving rocket.

Can you express the result you have in terms of ##E_0## rather than in terms of ##m## and ##v_0##?
Well, since ##E_0=\frac{1}{2}m v_0^2##, I think I can express the result as ##E_k=(0.0004)E_0## right?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jbriggs444
  • #50
Davidllerenav said:
Well, since ##E_0=\frac{1}{2}m v_0^2##, I think I can express the result as ##E_k=(0.0004)E_0## right?
Yes, that is what I get as well.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
55
Views
6K