Question about potential energy

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of potential energy in the context of gravitational fields, particularly focusing on the transition of a mass moving upward from the Earth's surface and its energy states. Participants explore the implications of gravitational potential energy, its behavior as the mass moves away from the Earth, and the differences between various equations for potential energy.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether potential energy is lost when a mass exits the gravitational field, suggesting that kinetic energy converts to potential energy and vice versa while within the field.
  • Another participant asserts that the gravitational field of the Earth is not confined to a finite region, indicating that the mass never truly escapes the field.
  • A participant explains that as the distance from the Earth increases, gravitational potential energy approaches zero, while kinetic energy decreases, but the total energy remains constant.
  • There is a discussion about the equation U=mgh, with participants noting that it is an approximation that assumes a constant gravitational field, which is not valid for large distances from the Earth.
  • Another participant emphasizes that only differences in potential energy are meaningful, regardless of the chosen reference point for potential energy calculations.
  • One participant introduces the idea that gravitational potential is negative with respect to infinity, and discusses the implications of moving upwards in a gravitational field.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of potential energy in gravitational fields, particularly regarding whether it can be considered lost or transformed. There is no consensus on the interpretation of potential energy as the mass moves away from the Earth.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference different equations for potential energy, highlighting the assumptions and limitations of each, particularly in relation to varying gravitational fields and reference points.

Xalkias
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Let's say we have a mass M at the ground of the Earth with speed U going upwards so its energy is E= kinetic. The speed is enough to surpass Earth's gravitational field so now it has a speed U2<U and its energy now is E= kinetic+potential. So my question now is: Is this potential energy lost? I mean when it's in the gravitational field its kinetic energy converts to potential and potential to kinetic when back down... So when it exits the field potential can no longer convert to kinetic? If this is the case where does potential energy goes ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It never exits the field. The gravitational field of the Earth is not limited to a finite region of space.
 
Like the post above mine says, the body never escapes the field. The potential energy is ##U=-\frac{GM_em}{r}## . As the distance increases, ##U## tends to zero.
For a body to escape the pull of Earth its kinetic energy ##K## must be greater than ##U## i.e., the total energy ##E=K+U## must be positive ( ##E## is constant).
As the distance increases, ##U## goes to zero and ##K## slowly decreases. The total energy ##E## will always remain constant though.
 
What about U=mgh ? As far as I know acording to this equation potential energy seems to be positive but also getting bigger as h growing. What's going on?
 
Xalkias said:
What about U=mgh ? As far as I know acording to this equation potential energy seems to be positive but also getting bigger as h growing. What's going on?
##U=mgh## is only an approximate relation ( where g doesn't change appreciably with distance). For your case, where the body wants to escape the Earth's attraction, you cannot assume ##g## to be constant. Also, in ##U=mgh##, the potential at the Earth's surface is zero and at a very large distance it's infinity. Compare this to ##-\frac {GM_em}{r}##
 
Xalkias said:
What about U=mgh ? As far as I know acording to this equation potential energy seems to be positive but also getting bigger as h growing. What's going on?
Only differences in potential energy are physically meaningful. The actual value at a chosen reference point is irrelevant.

When using ##U\, = \, mgh##, one is implicitly assuming a reference point at ground level, a height measured up from ground level and a potential energy of zero at the reference point.

When using ##U \, = \, - \frac{GM_em}{r}##, one is assuming a reference point at infinity, a radius measured out from the center of the Earth and a potential energy of zero at the reference point.

The difference between potential energy of a mass at a height of 10 meters above the Earth's surface and the potential energy energy of a mass at the Earth's surface is the same, either way. Both formulas give the same answer for the difference.
 
Xalkias said:
What about U=mgh ? As far as I know acording to this equation potential energy seems to be positive but also getting bigger as h growing. What's going on?
What's going on is that the gravitational potential on the Earth's surface is Negative (with respect to infinity). Moving upwards is going in the Positive direction (doing work against gravity). It's like climbing up a mineshaft. The whole shaft has negative height but your height is increasing as you move up. I heard the term "Number Line" on the Radio, this morning. Moving right on the number line is always Increasing; going Up through the gravity field is Increasing your Potential.
-GmM/(Greater R) is more than -GmM/(Small R)

As far as gravity is concerned, the absolute potential Everywhere in the Universe is Negative (until they find something with Negative Mass).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K