- #1
deda
- 185
- 0
These “types of energy” are pure result of Newtonian physics.
Their common element is the definition for the work done by constant force:
[tex]W = dE = Fdx[/tex]
If the force were variable then the definition would have looked like this:
[tex]W = dE = Fdx + xdF <=> E = Fx[/tex]
The kinetic energy comes out as a combination of this definition with Newton’s second flaw:
[tex]W = dE = Fdx = madx = m \frac{dV}{dt}dx = mVdV[/tex] from where
[tex]E_{kinetic} = \frac {mV^2}{2}[/tex]
The potential energy comes out as combination of the same definition with Newton’s gravity law:
[tex]W = dE = Fdx = \frac {GM_1M_2}{x^2}dx[/tex] from where
[tex]E_{potential} = - \frac {GM_1M_2}{x}[/tex]
What if I tell you that these Newton’s laws are flaw?
http://www.geocities.com/dr_physica/labour.doc
Just like every thing else in Archimedes’s physics energy also has its potential expressed in rather different counter parts than Jules (force is geometrical potential but we don’t measure it in meters).
Their common element is the definition for the work done by constant force:
[tex]W = dE = Fdx[/tex]
If the force were variable then the definition would have looked like this:
[tex]W = dE = Fdx + xdF <=> E = Fx[/tex]
The kinetic energy comes out as a combination of this definition with Newton’s second flaw:
[tex]W = dE = Fdx = madx = m \frac{dV}{dt}dx = mVdV[/tex] from where
[tex]E_{kinetic} = \frac {mV^2}{2}[/tex]
The potential energy comes out as combination of the same definition with Newton’s gravity law:
[tex]W = dE = Fdx = \frac {GM_1M_2}{x^2}dx[/tex] from where
[tex]E_{potential} = - \frac {GM_1M_2}{x}[/tex]
What if I tell you that these Newton’s laws are flaw?
http://www.geocities.com/dr_physica/labour.doc
Just like every thing else in Archimedes’s physics energy also has its potential expressed in rather different counter parts than Jules (force is geometrical potential but we don’t measure it in meters).