To calculate work done from a graph

AI Thread Summary
Work done is negative when the force acts in the opposite direction to the displacement. In this case, although the displacement is in the positive x direction, the force is negative, indicating it acts in the negative x direction. The increasing value of force does not change the fact that it opposes the displacement. Therefore, regardless of the force's magnitude, as long as it opposes the displacement, the work done remains negative. This concept clarifies the relationship between force, displacement, and work in physics.
esha
Messages
74
Reaction score
3
1507992042256.jpeg



In the given question part (a) I don't understand why the work done is negative? The answer says that the displacement is along positive x direction (i understand that) while force acting on the particle is along negative x direction ( why is that? since it appears that as the value of x is increasing so is the value of force. )
 
Physics news on Phys.org
esha said:
while force acting on the particle is along negative x direction
The value of the force is negative in that region, thus it points opposite to the displacement.
 
So it means that it doesn't matter doesn't matter whether the force is increasing or not in the negative region the force is increasing or not in the negative region
 
esha said:
So it means that it doesn't matter doesn't matter whether the force is increasing or not in the negative region the force is increasing or not in the negative region
Right. As long as the force and displacement are in opposite directions, the work done by the force will be negative.
 
oh... ok... its so fairly simple then
 

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

Why the work done is coming out to be positive?
Replies
9
Views
1K
Why the work done is the area enclosed by the graph of F versus x on x Axis?
Replies
16
Views
2K
B Work energy theorem by variable force
Replies
23
Views
2K
D'Alembert's principle and the work done by constraint forces
Replies
6
Views
3K
I Work-Energy Theorem for Moving Block and Spring System?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Can't find expression for work done by gravity. Please help.
Replies
3
Views
2K
Unraveling the Mystery of Work Done & Energy Transfer
Replies
20
Views
2K
Work Done by Gravity and Derivation of G.P.E.
Replies
9
Views
4K
A Calculate the work done by pressure rupturing a spherical containment
Replies
7
Views
1K
Work done under constant velocity
Replies
34
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top