What is the difference between Kinetic energy and momentum of a moving body?

AI Thread Summary
Kinetic energy and momentum are distinct concepts in physics, despite both being related to motion. Momentum is defined as a vector quantity, represented mathematically as mass times velocity, while kinetic energy is a scalar quantity, calculated as one-half mass times velocity squared. The key difference lies in their conservation laws; momentum is always conserved in isolated systems, whereas kinetic energy may not be conserved due to transformations into other energy forms. Additionally, momentum has directional components, allowing for vector operations, while energy is always a positive scalar. Understanding these differences is crucial for analyzing physical systems accurately.
gdpudasaini
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
Hi everybody! I was thinking about the difference between Kinetic energy and momentum of a body. According to Newton; Momentum is the quantity of motion i.e. momentum is the measure of motion. And Kinetic energy is the energy of motion of a moving body...Now i am confused; The above two definations of momentum and kinetic energy seems to say same thing. Then what is the difference between Kinetic energy and momentum of a moving body? Please can anybody explain me...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's best to look at the "mathematical" definitions of momentum and kinetic energy to see the difference. And btw, the "quantity of motion" is definitely not the same thing as the "energy of motion".
 
The biggest difference is that momentum is a vector with units of ML/T and kinetic energy is a scalar with units of ML²/T².
 
radou said:
It's best to look at the "mathematical" definitions of momentum and kinetic energy to see the difference. And btw, the "quantity of motion" is definitely not the same thing as the "energy of motion".

Its very easy to understand the difference if we look at mathematical equations. But what i want here is the way to visulaize them in a conceptual way..
 
In short, kinetic energy may be transformed into some other type of energy (electrical, potential...).
Momentum can't be transformed in anything else.

This means that an isolated system always conserves momentum (if you plot momentum versus time it will be a constant), but may or may not conserve kinetic energy (the plot kinetic energy versus time can be anything (of course, always a non-negative value, but besides that, there's no other restriction)).

I'm NOT saying energy isn't conserved. If you plot TOTAL energy (kinetic + potential + whatever other type of energy) of an isolated system, it will always be a constant, if you neglect any relativistic stuff (in which energy may be converted to mass and vice-versa, but if you include it in the "whatever" part, you get your energy conservation back).

Another important diff: momentum is a vector. It has x, y, z components, may be coordinate transformed, you may do vector products with it. Energy is a positive scalar, no components.

The time derivative of momentum is Force (Force is always a vector). The time derivative of energy will give you the power of a system (power is always a scalar).
 
gdpudasaini said:
what is the difference between Kinetic energy and momentum of a moving body?

Momentum, like energy, has many forms in nature. As for the difference between the two, a specific example may be instructive. A spherical shell of charge, which has always moved at a constant, low (<<c) speed, has an electromagnetic field characterized by both momentum and energy densities. If the momentum density is integrated over all of space, one obtains a vector result that equals a constant (the shell's "electromagnetic mass") times the shell's velocity. If the magnetic field energy is integrated over all of space, one obtains a scalar result equal to the electromagnetic mass times v*v/2. The field momentum equals part of the force, required to accelerate the charge from rest, multiplied by the time the force acts. (The other part is found in a radiation field). The energy (in the magnetic field) equals part of the force, required to accelerate the charge from rest, multiplied by the distance through which the force acts. These two quantities, while related, have their own particular units and are distinct for this reason, plus the fact that the momentum is a vector quantity, whereas the energy is a scalar. The unit of energy is the joule. It's high time someone gave the unit of momentum a name.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top