Prove energy of a falling body is constant

DorelXD
Messages
126
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove that the enrgy of a falling body remains constat using the derivate of a function

Homework Equations



We need to prove that:

\frac{mv^2}{2} + mgh is constant, trhat is its derivate equals 0

The Attempt at a Solution



Let the positive direction be downward. Applying Newton's second law we get:

mg = F = ma

Now I differentiated the expression and I got:

Fv + \frac{dh}{dt}mg

If I replace mg with F, I get:

F(v+\frac{dh}{dt})

Now, how do I show that this equals 0? I don'y get it. I know that probably some elemntary fact is escaping me, but what? Could you please explain me? Thank you very much!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello.

How is dh/dt related to v?
 
I think I've found the answer. If dx is the change in the position of the body, then dx=-dh, so dh/dt=-dx/dt=-v, right? Another way I thought about it would be. Let A be a point such that h=AB, where B it's at ground level. Let O an arbitrary point in space, that it's on the direction of AB. Then we have that OA+ AB is constat, that is x+h is constant, and this means that d(x+h)/dt=0 . I believe that both arguments are solid and correct, but could you please give me your opinion?
 
Yes. That looks good.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top