Problem involvining Kinetic and gravitational potential energy

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on demonstrating the conversion of gravitational potential energy (PE) to kinetic energy (KE) through a physics experiment. A student proposes using a ramp and a ball to illustrate this principle, starting with the ball at a height to represent maximum potential energy and then allowing it to roll down to gain kinetic energy. Other participants note that the ramp experiment is common in textbooks, emphasizing the limited options for demonstrating this energy transformation. Suggestions for alternative methods are sought, but the consensus is that the ramp experiment effectively captures the essence of PE and KE. The conversation highlights the challenge of finding unique ways to illustrate these fundamental physics concepts.
hraklis_1
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello. I'm in gr.11 physics, and we are currently working on Kinetic and gravitational potential energy. We have been asked to create a procedure which shows how gravitational potential energy is turned into kinetic energy(afterwards we will do calculations and such showing the relationshi). We are going to an ice rink to do this (to reduce friction i presume). So far, I have come up with a simple experiment of using a ramp, and dropping the ball down it. The ball starts at the top, having full potential energy, and when it begins to move it gains kinetic energy. However, i was wondering if anyone else could suggest some other ideas on ways i can go about showing this (I have the ramp idea, but are there any other better ways?). Help would be greatly appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
heh, the ramp thing is practically in every textbook I've ever seen. Its pretty hard to go far from that as far as i can tell because all there really is to look at is PE and KE. The only way to show gravitational PE is to put an object in the air and the only way to show KE is to let that object move (presumably, straight down or onto a ramp to change direction)
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top