Potential energy of a system of particles

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the total potential energy of a system of two particles and its dependence on their relative position. It is established that the interaction potential, such as gravitational or electrostatic, relies on the relative position of the particles. The application of Newton's laws reveals that the forces between the particles can be expressed in terms of their relative velocities, leading to a relationship between kinetic energy and potential energy. The conclusion emphasizes that the conservation of mechanical energy holds true when considering the potential as a function of relative position. This understanding is crucial for proving the initial hypothesis regarding the total potential energy of the system.
quasar987
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Messages
4,796
Reaction score
32
Hi.

In trying to convince myself that the total potential energy of a system of two particles was just the potential energy of one particle computed while considering the other particle fixed, I imagined two identical particles a distance 2r apart and attracting each other, and concluded that their total kinetic energy when they meet would be the same if both particles were free as if one was fixed.

But I don't know how to prove the thing in the most general case possible. Can anyone help?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sure enough:
This is because the interaction potential must depend (as in the cases of gravitational/electrostatic potentials) on the particles RELATIVE position.
Let us state Newton's 2.laws on 2 particles, along with Newton's 3.law:
\vec{F}_{12}=m_{1}\vec{a}_{1} (1)
\vec{F}_{21}=m_{2}\vec{a}_{2}(2)
\vec{F}_{12}=-\vec{F}_{21}
(I hope the notations speak for themselves..)
Now, form the dot products with the respective velocities, and add them together:
\vec{F}_{12}\cdot\vec{v}_{1}+\vec{F}_{21}\cdot\vec{v}_{2}=\frac{d}{dt}(\frac{1}{2}m_{1}\vec{v}_{1}^{2}+\frac{1}{2}m_{2}\vec{v}_{2}^{2})
Or, identifying the kinetic energy of the system \mathcal{K} along with use of 3.law:
\vec{F}_{12}\cdot\vec{v}_{12}=\frac{d\mathcal{K}}{dt}(3)
where I have introduced the relative velocity of particle 1, with respect to particle 2.

Now, let \vec{F}_{12}=-\nabla{V}_{12}, V_{12}=V_{12}(\vec{r}_{12})
that is, the potential is a function of the relative velocity.
This is required in order that we may integrate (3) with respect to time to gain conservation of mechanical energy:
\mathcal{K}+V_{12}=C
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes ilyandm
Fantastic! Thanks arildno!
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top