Mechanical Energy and Frames of Reference

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the apparent inconsistency in mechanical energy consumption observed by two observers in different frames of reference regarding a spaceship's acceleration. Observer 1, moving with the spaceship, calculates a fuel consumption of 0.5*m*3v² joules, while Observer 2, at rest relative to the spaceship, notes a consumption of 0.5*m*v² joules. The resolution lies in considering the energy of the ejected gases, which conserves momentum and reconciles the differing observations. This principle is further illustrated through a similar scenario involving a ball rolling down a hill from different observer perspectives.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of classical mechanics and energy conservation principles
  • Familiarity with frames of reference in physics
  • Basic knowledge of momentum and kinetic energy equations
  • Concept of potential energy and its transformation into kinetic energy
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the concept of frames of reference in detail, focusing on inertial and non-inertial frames
  • Explore the conservation of momentum in various physical scenarios
  • Learn about energy transformations, particularly in systems involving propulsion and ejection
  • Investigate the mathematical formulations of kinetic and potential energy in different reference frames
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching mechanics, and anyone interested in understanding the nuances of energy conservation across different frames of reference.

CharlesEster6
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I've come up with a simple, imaginary situation that bugs me. Could someone help resolve my confusion?

Let's say that a spaceship is traveling through space, and two people- observer 1 and observer 2- are watching it. Both observers can monitor the ship's speed and the amount of fuel in its "gas tank." Initially, the ship is moving at speed v with respect to observer 1, and is at rest with respect to observer 2.

Now the spaceship accelerates, so it is moving at speed v with respect to observer 2 and speed 2*v with respect to observer 1. Observer 2 notes that 0.5*m*v2 (m is the mass of the ship) joules of energy are withdrawn from the fuel during this period of acceleration, but to observer 1 it appears that 0.5*m*((2v)2 - v2), or 0.5*m*3v2 joules of energy are consumed. It can't be true that observer 1 records three times more fuel used than observer 2; what accounts for this "inconsistency?"

Thank you!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You need to take into account the energy of the burnt fuel ejected. The energy from burning the fuel goes into ejecting hot gases in one direction and moving the spaceship forward in the other direction in such a way that the total momentum is conserved. If you are careful about taking into account the energy of the gases, there is no inconsistency.

A similar problem is the following:
A ball is stationary at the top of a hill, and someone gives it an infintesimal knock and it rolls down the hill losing potential energy, and gaining kinetic energy until it has final velocity v. (No friction). This sounds sensible.

Now imagine the situation from an observer moving at velocity v. He sees the ball moving away from him, then it rolls down the hill losing potential energy, and eventually comes to rest, losing kinetic energy too! This sounds crazy.

The resolution is along the same lines as your spaceship.
Peter
 
Hi CharlesEster6 and peteratcam, Welcome to PF,

This is a good question, and peter is correct about the resolution. There is a https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=199087" thread about this same subject where the math in the tutorial was discussed in detail.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
6K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K