Understanding GPE to KE Conversion on a Ramp | Simplified Physics Explanation

  • Thread starter Thread starter TerryB
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gpe Ramp
AI Thread Summary
When a ball rolls down a ramp, its gravitational potential energy (GPE) converts to kinetic energy (KE), represented by the equation mgh=(1/2)mv^2, which simplifies to gh=(1/2)v^2 after canceling mass. The discussion reveals confusion regarding the expected graph of change in height versus velocity, as the equation suggests a quadratic relationship, yet the plotted graph appears linear. The user acknowledges a potential misunderstanding in notation, clarifying that v^2 indicates velocity squared, not multiplied by two. Despite recalculating by hand, the user suspects the graph's shallow curve may obscure the expected quadratic shape. This highlights the importance of careful plotting and understanding of mathematical relationships in physics.
TerryB
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Ok now my problem is this- Ignoring resistances (I'm factoring these in later), if a ball rolls down a ramp the initial GPE energy goes to KE.

So the equation would be mgh=(1/2)mv*2 so mass cancels out leaving gh=(1/2)v*2
multiply by two gives 2gh=v*2.

So I have plotted a graph of change in height by Velocity and resulted in a straight line graph. I'd have thought this was wrong as by the equation above the change in height is proportional to velocity squared so should it not be a curve?

There's probably something completely stupid I'm doing but I've been doing Physics for 6 days straight so my mind's gone blank.

Any help is much appreciated
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure what language you used, but usually v*2 means v times 2, multiply, not exponentiate. If you're using a spreadsheet, it should have some type of power() function.
 
Oops my bad! As I said I'm tired :p I meant to say v^2

And I've done it by hand but its still a straight line. I have a feeling its because the curve is rather shallow so it is hard to see it on my graph.
 
Last edited:
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top