Question about law of conservation of mechanical energy

AI Thread Summary
The discussion clarifies the distinction between the conservation of momentum and the conservation of mechanical energy in isolated systems. While momentum conservation requires no external forces, mechanical energy conservation can include conservative forces like gravity. Gravity is not considered an external force in this context because it is accounted for in the potential energy term (U). The law states that the total mechanical energy (kinetic plus potential) remains constant if only conservative forces are acting. Understanding this distinction is crucial for applying these principles correctly in physics problems.
Sinistar9
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello, i was wondering if someone can help me out.
I finished law of momentum, and learned that for the conservation of momentum to be applicable, the system must be isolated.

An isolated system means no external forces, correct?

if i am correct, then i don't understand the law of conservation of mechanical energy.
it says that conservation of mechanical energy must be in an isolated system.

this is K + U (initals) = K + U (finals)

but the U term is mgh, which has gravity in it. isn't gravity an external force?
so how is this an isolated system?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For energy, Earth is considered part of the system. Since the change in energy imparted to the Earth as a result of for instance, "falling toward a ball," is negligible, we can ignore the change in the Earth's energy in this equation as it essentially cancels itself out. That is essentially the basis of the way we define gravitational potential energy for these common situations.
 
Last edited:
That's a good question. Let's take a simple example.

If a 1 kg stone falls under gravity, from a height of 10 metres it begins with a U of 1*9.81*10 = 98.1 Joules.

According to the conservation of energy, it ends with a velocity given by 98.1 = 1/2 * mv2
so v= sqrt(2*98.1) = 14 m/sec

Is momentum conserved? Initial momentum is zero. final momentum is 14.

So an external force (gravity) messes with the momentum conservation but not the energy conservation.
It's a bit subtle but with practice you'll learn to recognise situations where momentum and/or energy are being 'injected' into a system (or taken out) and how to handle it. Talk to your teacher about it.
 
For energy conservation, it is sufficient that all external forces are conservative - that is equivalent to "you can introduce a potential energy". Gravity is conservative.
"No external forces" is required for momentum conservation only.
 
Sinistar9 said:
An isolated system means no external forces, correct?

if i am correct, then i don't understand the law of conservation of mechanical energy.
it says that conservation of mechanical energy must be in an isolated system.

this is K + U (initals) = K + U (finals)

but the U term is mgh, which has gravity in it. isn't gravity an external force?
so how is this an isolated system?

You've already taken gravity into account by way of the potential energy, so it doesn't count as an "external force" in your definition.

A better statement of the law of conservation of mechanical energy is that the sum of K + U is constant, provided that there are no non-conservative forces (e.g. friction), and that you've taken all the conservative forces into account in the potential energy U.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
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