Undestand that Kinetic(max) = Dynamic(max)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hepic
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Kinetic energy and dynamic energy are equivalent in a closed system, reflecting the principle of conservation of energy. This equivalence is supported by both empirical observations and theoretical frameworks, notably through Emmy Noether's theorem. Noether's theorem explains that the constancy of total energy arises from the laws of physics being dependent on relative times rather than absolute times. Additionally, it asserts that total linear momentum and angular momentum are also conserved due to their dependence on relative positions and orientations. Understanding these principles is crucial for grasping fundamental concepts in physics.
Hepic
Messages
118
Reaction score
0
In physic,is true that energy of an object is the same.So we undestand that Kinetic(max)=Dynamic(max).
Why is that true?? There is any explanation with equations,or just only via observation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That the total energy of a closed system of objects interacting with one another is constant is an empirical fact. However, we have good theoretical justifications for why the total energy ought to be constant.

The most amazing theory in physics that almost no one outside of the field has heard of is Emmy Noether's theorem.

What her theorem says is that

Because the laws of physics depend on only relative positions and not absolute positions, the total linear momentum is constant.

Because the laws of physics depend on only relative times and not absolute times, the total energy is constant.

Because the laws of physics depend on only relative orientation, and not absolute orientation, the total angular momentum is constant.There are other more exotic symmetries too leading to things like conservation of electric charge.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top