Unraveling the Mystery Behind Energy Equations

  • Thread starter Thread starter Inertigratus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
AI Thread Summary
The similarity in energy equations, such as those for kinetic energy and energy stored in capacitors and inductors, arises from their underlying linear relationships, where energy is derived as the area under a linear graph or through integration. This results in a common factor of 1/2 in their equations, particularly evident in kinetic energy being quadratic in velocity. The discussion highlights that while kinetic energy follows this standard form, potential energy can vary and does not adhere to a single equation. The reasons for the quadratic relationship in kinetic energy may stem from principles in relativity, where action is linked to the integral of arclength. Ultimately, the discussion suggests that while there are multiple explanations for these forms, establishing a definitive cause-and-effect relationship is complex.
Inertigratus
Messages
123
Reaction score
0
I was just wondering, why do the energy equations look so alike?
Refering to kinetic energy, the energy stored by capacitors and inductors, etc.
My teacher in electromagnetism said something about it, that there's a reason for this.
The energy is proportional to some rate of change squared?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In all the cases you've mentioned we have an underlying linear relationship (e.g. between charge and voltage for a capacitor, momentum and velocity for a moving body), and the energy is found as the area of a triangle underneath the linear graph, or, algebraically as the integral of kx wrt x. Hence the 1/2.

[Where we don't have the linear relationship (e.g. the non-linear momentum-velocity relationship in Special Relativity) we don't get the (1/2) k x^2 form for energy]
 
Last edited:
Usually you'll find kinetic energy to be quadratic in velocities
Why?
depends where you're coming from really, it could be a 'it just is' matter or it could be because the action in relativity is proportional to the integral of arclength. you could perhaps argue that it must be velocities squared because it shouldn't matter which direction the velocity is in
there are lots of reasons that it should be in the form that it is but would it be possible to say which is the cause of it's form and which are the cause of it's form? I'd guess not
the potential energy doesn't have this same standard form however, it can be any function of coordinates you want it to be

just my two cents
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
Back
Top