Is Gravitational Potential Energy real?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of gravitational potential energy, particularly whether it is an intrinsic property of an object or dependent on the chosen reference point for measuring height. Participants explore the implications of setting different zero levels for gravitational potential energy and whether this energy can be measured directly without performing work on the object.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions if gravitational potential energy is intrinsic to an object or if it solely depends on the reference point chosen for measurement.
  • Another participant notes that kinetic energy is also not intrinsic, as it varies with the observer's reference frame.
  • It is mentioned that potential energy arises from the interaction between the Earth and the object, and that the zero point of potential energy is arbitrary due to the constant gravitational force at small distances on Earth's surface.
  • Several participants emphasize that gravitational potential energy is relative, using the example of a skier on a mountain to illustrate how potential energy can be positive or negative depending on the reference point.
  • One participant highlights that thermodynamics focuses on changes in energy rather than absolute quantities, reinforcing the need for an arbitrary reference point in discussing potential energy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether gravitational potential energy can be considered intrinsic. While some acknowledge its dependence on reference points, others explore the implications of this relativity without reaching a consensus.

Contextual Notes

The discussion reflects limitations in defining gravitational potential energy, particularly regarding the assumptions about reference points and the nature of energy measurements. There are unresolved questions about the intrinsic qualities of potential energy compared to kinetic energy.

Mattowander
Messages
159
Reaction score
0
Exactly what the title says. I wonder if gravitational potential energy close to the Earth is something intrinsic in the object that can be measured or is it completely dependent upon where we consider our 0 level to be. For example if we lifted an object a distance h above the ground and set it on a table, would we be able to measure the potential energy without pushing that object off the table? Obviously if we did that we could measure the final velocity of that object assuming we could apply the conservation of mechanical energy but is there any way we can directly measure the gravitational potential energy of an object? I ask this question because unless I am mistaken, in this type of situation we are free to choose where we set y = 0 and therefore we could give an object a desired potential energy simply by changing what we consider to be ground level.

Am I over-thinking this problem or over thinking it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It depends on what you mean by "real".

AM
 
I know I phrased that badly. But I keep thinking of the following situation : Close to Earth,thinking in 2-D, an object has gravitational potential energy equal to mgh where h is the height above the point y = 0. Since we can set y = 0 at an arbitrary position and therefore give the object pretty much any potential energy we desire, I'm wondering if an object can have an intrinsic potential energy like it has an intrinsic kinetic energy relative to the Earth.

I hope that even though I might have made a mistake in my writing that you can still get the gist of what I'm trying to say.
 
Two points. First kinetic energy is not as intrinsic as you may think -- it depends on the observer's reference frame. An observer moving with constant velocity will measure a different kinetic energy.

Second, the potential energy is coming from the interaction between the Earth and the object. Truly, the potential energy involves the distances between the two centers (of the Earth and the object). But for the very small distances involved on the surface of the earth, the interaction is practically constant (F = GMm/r^2). This is why the zero point of the potential energy is arbitrary.
 
Mattowander said:
I know I phrased that badly. But I keep thinking of the following situation : Close to Earth,thinking in 2-D, an object has gravitational potential energy equal to mgh where h is the height above the point y = 0. Since we can set y = 0 at an arbitrary position and therefore give the object pretty much any potential energy we desire, I'm wondering if an object can have an intrinsic potential energy like it has an intrinsic kinetic energy relative to the Earth.

I hope that even though I might have made a mistake in my writing that you can still get the gist of what I'm trying to say.

Remember that Thermodynamics (i.e. the study of energy) does not deal with quantities of energy, but rather changes in energy. Therefore an arbitrary reference point is required to describe the change in potential energy of an object from one elevation to another.

CS
 
Mattowander said:
I know I phrased that badly. But I keep thinking of the following situation : Close to Earth,thinking in 2-D, an object has gravitational potential energy equal to mgh where h is the height above the point y = 0. Since we can set y = 0 at an arbitrary position and therefore give the object pretty much any potential energy we desire, I'm wondering if an object can have an intrinsic potential energy like it has an intrinsic kinetic energy relative to the Earth.

I hope that even though I might have made a mistake in my writing that you can still get the gist of what I'm trying to say.
As several posters have mentioned, gravitational potential energy is relative. A skier half way up a mountain has positive potential energy with respect to the bottom but negative potential energy with respect to the top. If the skier goes down the hill, that potential energy is converted into kinetic energy, which would seem pretty real to the skier. If the skier goes up the hill, he has to do work against gravity, which is also pretty real to the skier.

When we talk about gravitational potential energy being -GMm/r it is relative to the potential at r = \infty.

AM
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
7K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K