Potential Energy After Escape Velocity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of potential energy in the context of an object achieving escape velocity from a planet. When the object is launched, its kinetic energy is initially positive while its potential energy, relative to infinity, is negative due to the gravitational binding. As the object escapes the planet's gravity, its kinetic energy decreases while its potential energy approaches zero, maintaining a constant total energy. The potential energy doesn't disappear; rather, it is converted as the object moves away from the gravitational influence. This illustrates the relationship between kinetic and potential energy in gravitational systems.
metapad
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
I'm not quite sure I'm understanding potential energy correctly. Let's say we have a runaway planet in deep space which is going in a perfectly straight line. The planet is perfectly spherical and doesn't have an atmosphere. If an object on the surface spontaneously (for the sake of simplicity as it's not the point) acquires a high upward velocity, it's kinetic energy should gradually be converted to potential energy as gravity slows it down, right? Well let's say that when the object was launched it had achieved escape velocity and eventually escapes the planet's gravity and drifts away from the planet. Let's say the object never gets caught in the planet's field of gravity again. Since it's not going to go near the planet again, where did all of that potential energy go? Energy can't be created or destroyed so the potential energy can't just simply disappear... I'm confused X_X
 
Physics news on Phys.org
metapad said:
Since it's not going to go near the planet again, where did all of that potential energy go? Energy can't be created or destroyed so the potential energy can't just simply disappear... I'm confused X_X

It went into its freedom :-)
Consider this: you have a debt. You also have an income. Your income is used to pay back that debt, so at a certain point, you've paid back everything. Your debt doesn't exist anymore. Where did all the money of your income go ?

What happens is that gravitationally (or otherwise) bound systems have a *negative* potential energy as compared to free systems. They must first pay back their debt of binding energy before they can be free. Otherwise they remain bound.
 
metapad said:
I'm not quite sure I'm understanding potential energy correctly. Let's say we have a runaway planet in deep space which is going in a perfectly straight line. The planet is perfectly spherical and doesn't have an atmosphere. If an object on the surface spontaneously (for the sake of simplicity as it's not the point) acquires a high upward velocity,
it's kinetic energy should gradually be converted to potential energy as gravity slows it down, right? Well let's say that when the object was launched it had achieved escape velocity and eventually escapes the planet's gravity and drifts away from the planet. Let's say the object never gets caught in the planet's field of gravity again. Since it's not going to go near the planet again, where did all of that potential energy go? Energy can't be created or destroyed so the potential energy can't just simply disappear... I'm confused X_X

the kinetic energy of the launched object is initially some positive number and the potential energy (relative to infinity) is some negative number. When the rocket is far away (never to be seen by the planet again) the kinetic energy is some smaller positive number and the potential energy is zero. The sum of the kinetic and potential energy is constant throughout the process.
 
Ohh... Suppose that makes sense. Thanks :P
 
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