Understanding Work in Physics: Force and Displacement Relationship

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vykan12
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Work
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the definition of work in physics, specifically the relationship between force and displacement. One participant argues that work is calculated using the scalar product of force and potential displacement, while the teacher contends it should be based on the resultant displacement regardless of other forces. The conversation highlights confusion over how external forces influence the calculation of work, particularly in the case of gravity. It is clarified that the work done by gravity remains constant at mg(y_1 - y_2), demonstrating the properties of conservative forces. Understanding this distinction is crucial for accurately applying the concept of work in physics.
Vykan12
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
I've always thought that the work done by a force is the scalar product of the force vector and the potential displacement vector it would have if no other forces were acting on it. My teacher says that it is really the product of the force vector and the resultant displacement regardless of what other forces act on the system, and that you'd get the same net work with either calculation.

I don't see how the way he defines it would make any sense. For example, if you derive the work done by gravity, you could find it to be just about anything depending on the external forces in question, rather than just mg(y_1 - y_2). So what is the true convention?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Vykan12! :smile:

Work done by a particular force is (integral of) that force times the actual displacement (of the point of application of the force, if it's not a point body).

What the displacement would be if there were no other forces is irrelevant. :wink:
 
Vykan12 said:
For example, if you derive the work done by gravity, you could find it to be just about anything depending on the external forces in question, rather than just mg(y_1 - y_2).
No, regardless of the path the object takes the work done by gravity will always be mg(y_1 - y_2).
 
I can see that's where the properties of conservative forces come into play. Interesting.
 
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