Position as a function of energy

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of expressing position as a function of energy, particularly in the context of kinetic and potential energy. Participants explore whether such a relationship exists and its implications in physics, including potential applications in quantum mechanics or modern physics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the meaning of "position as a function of energy," suggesting that a clearer explanation in physical terms is needed to address the question.
  • It is noted that typical potential energy functions can be mathematically invertible, but this does not necessarily translate to a physical interpretation.
  • One participant argues that gravitational potential energy is not invertible in one dimension, while another counters that the function ##1/r## is invertible except at the singularity.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of measuring a particle's position and how this relates to defining position as a function of energy.
  • Participants express uncertainty about the physical relevance of mathematical invertibility and whether it applies to the discussion at hand.
  • It is pointed out that in three dimensions, the gravitational potential function is not invertible due to multiple positions corresponding to the same radius.
  • One participant emphasizes that the discussion of invertibility is a mathematical property and may not be relevant to the physics context being discussed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the concept of position as a function of energy. There are competing views regarding the invertibility of potential energy functions and their physical implications, leading to an unresolved discussion.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of clarity in defining what is meant by "position as a function of energy," as well as the dependence on specific definitions of potential energy functions and their mathematical properties.

dsaun777
Messages
296
Reaction score
39
I've seen position as a function of time in Newtonian physics and potential energy as a function of position, is there an inverse? Any instance where position is a function of energy eg KE, PE. Maybe this is more appropriate for quantum mechanics or modern physics.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dsaun777 said:
Any instance where position is a function of energy eg KE, PE.

I'm not sure what you mean by "position is a function of energy". Obviously in mathematical terms any invertible function can be inverted, and typical potential energy functions are invertible. But that doesn't tell you anything about the physics. You need to explain what you mean in terms of physics before we can answer your question.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
PeterDonis said:
and typical potential energy functions are invertible

Really? The gravitational potential energy is typical but the function of position is not invertible - not even in the one-dimensional case.
 
PeterDonis said:
I'm not sure what you mean by "position is a function of energy". Obviously in mathematical terms any invertible function can be inverted, and typical potential energy functions are invertible. But that doesn't tell you anything about the physics. You need to explain what you mean in terms of physics before we can answer your question.
For instance, we can make accurate enough predictions for a particles trajectory but there comes a point where we have to measure the particle to define exactly where it is.
 
DrStupid said:
The gravitational potential energy is typical but the function of position is not invertible - not even in the one-dimensional case.

Huh? ##1/r## is invertible (except for the edge case of ##r = 0##, but that can easily be handled with limits).
 
dsaun777 said:
we can make accurate enough predictions for a particles trajectory but there comes a point where we have to measure the particle to define exactly where it is

What does this have to do with "position as a function of energy"? I still don't understand what you're trying to ask.
 
PeterDonis said:
Huh? ##1/r## is invertible

##1/|r|## is not
 
DrStupid said:
##1/|r|## is not

It is for the range ##0 < r < \infty##, which is the relevant range.
 
PeterDonis said:
What does this have to do with "position as a function of energy"? I still don't understand what you're trying to ask.
Not too sure how to clarify it further. But you sort of answered by saying that potential functions are invertible. Could you elaborate on how they are invertible?
 
  • #10
dsaun777 said:
you sort of answered by saying that potential functions are invertible

Actually, that's not always true; @DrStupid correctly pointed out that in 3 dimensions, the standard gravitational potential function is not invertible (since it depends on the radius and there are multiple positions at any given radius).

In any case, as I said before, "invertible" is a mathematical property, not a physical property. If all you're interested in is what mathematical functions are invertible, that is a separate discussion that belongs in the math forum, not the physics forum. Here we assume your question is about physics.
 
  • #11
dsaun777 said:
Not too sure how to clarify it further.

In that case, this thread is closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K