Kinetic Energy rotational and translational conceptual question.

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a comparative analysis of a ball rolling down an incline with friction and a box sliding down an identical frictionless incline. Participants are exploring the implications of rotational and translational kinetic energy in determining which object reaches the bottom first.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the roles of translational and rotational energy in the motion of the ball and the box. Questions arise regarding the impact of friction on the ball's energy distribution and its effect on speed compared to the box.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the energy dynamics at play. Some participants suggest that the ball's rotational energy affects its speed, while others clarify that the energy is redistributed rather than lost. There is no explicit consensus on the final outcome, but various interpretations of the energy interactions are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants are considering the implications of the first law of thermodynamics and the specific conditions of the problem, such as the presence of friction and the nature of the inclines. There is an acknowledgment of the need for further information to fully resolve the question.

bdh2991
Messages
102
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A ball rolls without slipping down incline A, starting from
rest. At the same time, a box starts from rest and slides down incline B, which
is identical to incline A except that it is frictionless. Which arrives at the bottom
first? (a) The ball arrives first. (b) The box arrives first. (c) Both arrive at
the same time. (d) It is impossible to determine.

Homework Equations



KE = 1/2 I ω2

KE = 1/2 m v2

The Attempt at a Solution



I answered D because i felt that you would need to know how much work had been done by friction. The correct answer is B however, and I'm not certain why. Does the ball rolling down the incline have both rotational and translational energy?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, the ball has got both translational and rotational energy. It is the extra term (the rotational energy) that makes the ball reach the "bottom" second. This is a result of the first law of thermodynamics, which states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. :)
 
freddyfish said:
Yes, the ball has got both translational and rotational energy. It is the extra term (the rotational energy) that makes the ball reach the "bottom" second. This is a result of the first law of thermodynamics, which states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. :)

But wouldn't that mean it has more kinetic energy therefore it would be moving faster?
 
No, the rotational energy and the translational energy must share the amount of energy equal to the decrease in potential energy.
 
For the ball:

potential energy --> kinetic energy + rotational energy (both are nonnegative quantities).

Thus, the translational energy would be greater in the absence of the rotational energy.For the box, however: potential energy --> kinetic energy + rotational energy (where the rotational energy evidently is zero.) Thus, "maximal" kinetic energy.

Since the mass cancels out in both cases, the latter case involves a translational energy that is greater per unit mass and thus the box travels at a higher speed.
 
freddyfish said:
No, the rotational energy and the translational energy must share the amount of energy equal to the decrease in potential energy.

ok so basically the rotational + translation in the rolling ball would equal the translational of the sliding block, however because the rolling ball is losing energy to friction the box would be faster?
 
bdh2991 said:
ok so basically the rotational + translation in the rolling ball would equal the translational of the sliding block, however because the rolling ball is losing energy to friction the box would be faster?
Well, no, it's not losing energy to friction exactly. The friction is causing some the energy to go into rotational KE instead of linear KE. So the linear acceleration is less than if the ball were also on a frictionless surface. If the slopes were to level out then rise again, the two objects would reach the same height, but the ball would take longer to get there.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
21K
Replies
1
Views
2K