What does a body "emits" when falling down?

AI Thread Summary
When a physical body falls, it converts potential energy into kinetic energy without emitting anything in the process. In contrast, an electron transitioning from a higher to a lower energy level emits energy as electromagnetic waves due to conservation of energy. The discussion highlights the differences between classical mechanics and quantum mechanics, noting that the energy changes in electrons are not directly observable. When a falling object impacts the ground, its kinetic energy is transformed into vibrations and heat. Overall, the mechanisms of energy conversion differ significantly between macroscopic bodies and quantum particles.
Giuseppe94
Messages
1
Reaction score
2
I explain it better. If we bring an electron from higher to lower energy level, the energy gap will be emitted as electromagnetic wave, because of the conservation of energy. When the same situation applies for a physical body, for example letting if falling down from some height, what does it emit while losing its energy?

My answer would be: it it just emits what it received to increase its energy. Namely the electron was excited by a wave, so it emits wave by losing energy.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Giuseppe94 said:
what does it emit while losing its energy?
Nothing. The energy simply gets converted from potential energy to kinetic energy.

Giuseppe94 said:
My answer would be: it it just emits what it received to increase its energy. Namely the electron was excited by a wave, so it emits wave by losing energy.
What if the atom was excited by a collision with another atom?
 
Giuseppe94 said:
I explain it better. If we bring an electron from higher to lower energy level, the energy gap will be emitted as electromagnetic wave, because of the conservation of energy. When the same situation applies for a physical body, for example letting if falling down from some height, what does it emit while losing its energy?

My answer would be: it it just emits what it received to increase its energy. Namely the electron was excited by a wave, so it emits wave by losing energy.
I can see why it could appear to be inconsistent but the two cases you are comparing are significantly different. When you drop a hammer, it gains KE but then converts this KE when it actually hits the ground and the overall effect is that the energy goes into vibrations and heat. For an electron, what happens during the change in its energy level is not knowable because it's a Quantum Mechanical process, the emerging energy (the photon) is all we know about.
You can accelerate an electron over a high voltage gap (an electron gun in a CRT) and the electron then has identifiable Kinetic Energy which can do damage when it arrives at an object.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top