Need help with algebra in proving kinetic energy is not conserved

In summary: I'm not sure what you are saying.The condition ##X \ne 0## is equivalent to $$({m_1}{v_1})^2 + ({m_2}{v_2})^2 - 2{m_1}{v_1}{m_2}{v_2} \ne 0$$or, using the identity ##(a-b)^2=a^2+b^2-2ab##, equivalent to $$({m_1}{v_1}-{m_2}{v_2})^2 \ne 0$$or, using the fact that the masses are positive numbers, equivalent to $$|{v_1}-{v_2}| \ne
  • #1
Obliv
52
1
I'm trying to prove that kinetic energy is not conserved in inelastic collisions using the conservation of momentum. This is the set-up. An object A of momentum ##{m_1}{v_1}## collides inelastically with object B of momentum ##{m_2}{v_2}##
using momentum conservation ##P_i = P_f##
[tex] {m_1}{v_1} + {m_2}{v_2} = ({m_1}+{m_2}){v_f} [/tex] solving for ##v_f## we obtain
[tex] v_f = \frac{({m_1}{v_1}+{m_2}{v_2})}{({m_1}+{m_2})} [/tex] now the fun part
prove that [tex] KE_i \ne KE_f [/tex]
[tex] \frac{{m_1}{{v_1}^2}}{2} + \frac{{m_2}{{v_2}^2}}{2} \ne \frac{1}{2}({m_1} + {m_2})(\frac{{m_1}{v_1} + {m_2}{v_2}}{{m_1}+{m_2}})^2 [/tex]

I realize that the two quantities are no longer equal, especially if you try plugging in numbers. I was just wondering if this can be simplified to be seen more clearly.
I multiplied out the numerator and denominator and got some pretty nasty algebra.
[tex] \frac{{m_1}{{v_1}^2}}{2} + \frac{{m_2}{{v_2}^2}}{2} \ne \frac{1}{2}({m_1}+{m_2})\frac{({m_1}{v_1})^2 + 2{m_1}{v_1}{m_2}{v_2} + ({m_2}{v_2})^2}{{m_1}^2 + 2{m_1}{m_2} + {m_2}^2} [/tex]
I'll continue working on it later but if anyone has any shortcuts to simplifying this I would appreciate it.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Obliv said:
I'm trying to prove that kinetic energy is not conserved in inelastic collisions using the conservation of momentum. This is the set-up. An object A of momentum ##{m_1}{v_1}## collides inelastically with object B of momentum ##{m_2}{v_2}##
using momentum conservation ##P_i = P_f##
[tex] {m_1}{v_1} + {m_2}{v_2} = ({m_1}+{m_2}){v_f} [/tex] solving for ##v_f## we obtain
[tex] v_f = \frac{({m_1}{v_1}+{m_2}{v_2})}{({m_1}+{m_2})} [/tex] now the fun part
prove that [tex] KE_i \ne KE_f [/tex]
[tex] \frac{{m_1}{{v_1}^2}}{2} + \frac{{m_2}{{v_2}^2}}{2} \ne \frac{1}{2}({m_1} + {m_2})(\frac{{m_1}{v_1} + {m_2}{v_2}}{{m_1}+{m_2}})^2 [/tex]

I realize that the two quantities are no longer equal, especially if you try plugging in numbers. I was just wondering if this can be simplified to be seen more clearly.
I multiplied out the numerator and denominator and got some pretty nasty algebra.
[tex] \frac{{m_1}{{v_1}^2}}{2} + \frac{{m_2}{{v_2}^2}}{2} \ne \frac{1}{2}({m_1}+{m_2})\frac{({m_1}{v_1})^2 + 2{m_1}{v_1}{m_2}{v_2} + ({m_2}{v_2})^2}{{m_1}^2 + 2{m_1}{m_2} + {m_2}^2} [/tex]
I'll continue working on it later but if anyone has any shortcuts to simplifying this I would appreciate it.
You could look at the expression $$X=\frac{{m_1}{{v_1}^2}}{2} + \frac{{m_2}{{v_2}^2}}{2} - \frac{1}{2}({m_1} + {m_2})(\frac{{m_1}{v_1} + {m_2}{v_2}}{{m_1}+{m_2}})^2$$
You want to see under what condition ##X \neq 0##.

Simplify the expression by multiplying with ##2(m_1+m_2)##:
You get $$2(m_1+m_2)X=({m_1}{{v_1}^2}+ {m_2}{{v_2}^2})(m_1+m_2) - (m_1v_1+m_2v_2)^2$$

Now work out the RHS.
 
  • #3
Okay I continued and got this
[tex] 2({m_1}+{m_2})X = ({m_1}{v_1}^2+{m_2}{v_2}^2)({m_1}+{m_2}) - ({m_1}{v_1} + {m_2}{v_2})^2 [/tex]
[tex] 2({m_1}+{m_2})X = ({m_1}{v_1})^2 + {m_1}{m_2}{v_2}^2 + {m_1}{m_2}{v_1}^2 + ({m_2}{v_2})^2 - (({m_1}{v_1})^2 + 2{m_1}{v_1}{m_2}{v_2} + ({m_2}{v_2})^2) [/tex]
Which simplifies to [tex]2({m_1}+{m_2})X = {m_1}{m_2}{v_2}^2 + {m_1}{m_2}{v_1} - 2{m_1}{v_1}{m_2}{v_2}[/tex]
and if you take out an ##({m_1}{m_2})##
[tex] 2({m_1} + {m_2})X = ({m_1}{m_2})({v_2}^2 + {v_1} + 2{v_1}{v_2}) [/tex] and we can conclude now that ##X \ne 0## when neither ##{m_2} \ne 0 ## nor ##{m_1} \ne 0## or if ##{v_2}^2 + {v_1} + 2{v_1}{v_2} \ne 0##

Is this correct?
 
  • #4
Obliv said:
Okay I continued and got this
[tex] 2({m_1}+{m_2})X = ({m_1}{v_1}^2+{m_2}{v_2}^2)({m_1}+{m_2}) - ({m_1}{v_1} + {m_2}{v_2})^2 [/tex]
[tex] 2({m_1}+{m_2})X = ({m_1}{v_1})^2 + {m_1}{m_2}{v_2}^2 + {m_1}{m_2}{v_1}^2 + ({m_2}{v_2})^2 - (({m_1}{v_1})^2 + 2{m_1}{v_1}{m_2}{v_2} + ({m_2}{v_2})^2) [/tex]
Which simplifies to [tex]2({m_1}+{m_2})X = {m_1}{m_2}{v_2}^2 + {m_1}{m_2}{v_1} - 2{m_1}{v_1}{m_2}{v_2}[/tex]
and if you take out an ##({m_1}{m_2})##
[tex] 2({m_1} + {m_2})X = ({m_1}{m_2})({v_2}^2 + {v_1} + 2{v_1}{v_2}) [/tex] and we can conclude now that ##X \ne 0## when neither ##{m_2} \ne 0 ## nor ##{m_1} \ne 0## or if ##{v_2}^2 + {v_1} + 2{v_1}{v_2} \ne 0##

Is this correct?
No.
The result has to be symmetric in ##m_1, m_2##, which it is.
But also in ##v_1, v_2##, which your result is not.
Check the term ##{m_1}{m_2}{v_1}## ...
There also is a sign error in your last expression.

I think you can take as given that the masses ##m_1, m_2## are strictly positive numbers.
 
  • Like
Likes Obliv
  • #5
Samy_A said:
No.
The result has to be symmetric in ##m_1, m_2##, which it is.
But also in ##v_1, v_2##, which your result is not.
Check the term ##{m_1}{m_2}{v_1}## ...
There also is a sign error in your last expression.

I think you can take as given that the masses ##m_1, m_2## are strictly positive numbers.

Yes I forgot a power of 2 [tex]2({m_1}+{m_2})X = {m_1}{m_2}{v_2}^2 + {m_1}{m_2}{v_1} - 2{m_1}{v_1}{m_2}{v_2}[/tex] here

[tex]2({m_1}+{m_2})X = {m_1}{m_2}{v_2}^2 + {m_1}{m_2}{v_1}^2 - 2{m_1}{v_1}{m_2}{v_2}[/tex]

and then [tex] 2({m_1} + {m_2})X = ({m_1}{m_2})({v_2}^2 + {v_1}^2 - 2{v_1}{v_2}) [/tex]

If this is correct, ##X \ne 0## when either ##{m_1} > 0## or ##{m_2} > 0## as well as if ##{v_2}^2 + {v_1}^2 - 2{v_1}{v_2} \ne 0##
 
  • #6
Obliv said:
Yes I forgot a power of 2 [tex]2({m_1}+{m_2})X = {m_1}{m_2}{v_2}^2 + {m_1}{m_2}{v_1} - 2{m_1}{v_1}{m_2}{v_2}[/tex] here

[tex]2({m_1}+{m_2})X = {m_1}{m_2}{v_2}^2 + {m_1}{m_2}{v_1}^2 - 2{m_1}{v_1}{m_2}{v_2}[/tex]

and then [tex] 2({m_1} + {m_2})X = ({m_1}{m_2})({v_2}^2 + {v_1}^2 - 2{v_1}{v_2}) [/tex]

If this is correct, ##X \ne 0## when either ##{m_1} > 0## or ##{m_2} > 0## as well as if ##{v_2}^2 + {v_1}^2 - 2{v_1}{v_2} \ne 0##
"either ##{m_1} > 0## or ##{m_2} > 0##" is not correct, as the masses are both positive numbers.

For ##X \ne 0##, the condition is ##{v_2}^2 + {v_1}^2 - 2{v_1}{v_2} \ne 0##.
This last expression can be simplified, using the well known identity ##(a-b)²=a²-2ab+b²##.
You then will get a nice condition for ##X \ne 0##, which will make sense if we remember that ##X## is the difference in kinetic energy (before and after the collision).
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Samy_A said:
The masses are positive numbers.
So, for ##X \ne 0##, the condition is ##{v_2}^2 + {v_1}^2 - 2{v_1}{v_2} \ne 0##.
This last expression can be simplified, using the well known identity ##(a-b)²=a²-2ab+b²##.
You then will get a nice condition for ##X \ne 0##, which will make sense if we remember that ##X## is the difference in kinetic energy (before and after the collision).

so it can be written as [tex] 2({m_1} + {m_2})X = ({m_1}{m_2})({v_1}^2 - {v_2}^2) [/tex] and expressed such that ##X \ne 0## when (##{m_1} > 0## and ##{m_2} > 0##) and ##{v_2} \ne {v_1}##? is this correct or should I go further?
 
  • #8
Obliv said:
so it can be written as [tex] 2({m_1} + {m_2})X = ({m_1}{m_2})({v_1}^2 - {v_2}^2) [/tex] and expressed such that ##X \ne 0## when (##{m_1} > 0## and ##{m_2} > 0##) and ##{v_2} \ne {v_1}##? is this correct or should I go further?
No, this is not totally correct.
From ##2({m_1} + {m_2})X = ({m_1}{m_2})({v_2}^2 + {v_1}^2 - 2{v_1}{v_2})##, you get ##2({m_1} + {m_2})X = {m_1}{m_2}(v_2-v_1)²##,
##(v_2-v_1)²## is not necessarily equal to ##{v_1}^2 - {v_2}^2##.

The conclusion is correct. The kinetic energies will be different when ##(v_2-v_1)² \ne 0##, that is when ##v_1 \ne v_2##.
 
  • Like
Likes Obliv
  • #9
I was very tired and wrote the tex incorrectly. I meant what you wrote and that's what I had on my scrap paper. Thank you for your guidance :)
 
  • #10
You are welcome.
 

1. What is kinetic energy?

Kinetic energy is the energy that an object possesses due to its motion. It is defined as one-half the mass of an object multiplied by its velocity squared.

2. How is kinetic energy calculated?

Kinetic energy is calculated using the formula KE = 1/2mv^2, where m is the mass of the object and v is its velocity.

3. Why is kinetic energy important?

Kinetic energy is important because it is a fundamental concept in physics and is used to explain the motion of objects. It is also a key component in understanding the conservation of energy.

4. How is kinetic energy related to the conservation of energy?

According to the law of conservation of energy, energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transferred or transformed. Kinetic energy is one type of energy that can be transferred or transformed into other forms, such as potential energy or thermal energy.

5. How can you prove that kinetic energy is not conserved?

One way to prove that kinetic energy is not conserved is by conducting an experiment where the initial and final kinetic energies of a system do not match. This could be due to external forces acting on the system, such as friction, which dissipates some of the kinetic energy into other forms, thereby violating the conservation of energy.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
789
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
825
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Engineering and Comp Sci Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
2K
Back
Top