What Is the Connection Between Energy, Potential, and Work?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nouveau_riche
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Work
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the definitions and relationships between energy, potential, and work. Energy is defined as the capacity to do work, while potential energy refers to energy stored in a system that can be converted into kinetic energy. The conversation highlights that energy can be positive or negative based on conventions, particularly in contexts like gravitational and nuclear energy. Key insights include that the total energy of a system is the sum of its kinetic and potential energies, and that energy transformations are fundamental in understanding physical processes.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic physics concepts such as energy, work, and potential energy.
  • Familiarity with the laws of thermodynamics and energy conservation.
  • Knowledge of different forms of energy, including kinetic, potential, and thermal energy.
  • Basic grasp of quantum mechanics and its implications on energy definitions.
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the concept of energy transformations in thermodynamics.
  • Learn about gravitational potential energy and its applications in physics.
  • Investigate the relationship between energy and work in mechanical systems.
  • Study the implications of energy conservation in quantum mechanics.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physics students, educators, and anyone interested in deepening their understanding of energy dynamics, potential energy, and the principles of work in various physical contexts.

  • #61
russ_watters said:
If there is no motion, there is no energy requirement, as per w=fd. If d=0, w=0, regardless of what f is.

Alright then. Just to be clear, though, when you say no energy requirement, do you mean no net difference between energy levels? I'm thinking of the second law of thermodynamics here. Would a high relative energy cause a force on a low relative energy only if there is motion/change in position(using W = Fd, not things like nuclear energy)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
The second law of thermo doesn't say anything about force.
 
  • #63
Ok, then. I'll think I'll just wait until the upper classes in college for those kinds of things.
 
  • #64
MrNerd said:
Hmmmm... I was sure it was. ...Could you explain which forces don't need energy to operate, please?

It would be easier to answer a more specific question since I don't quite follow what you mean by a force that needs energy or operate. Let me try to clarify the relationship between force, energy, work, and distance.

Imagine a cylinder filled with gas at pressure 'p' pushing on a piston. This means that there is potential energy stored in the gas so it is capable of doing work. The force applied to the piston is, F=p*A. Now let's consider two cases: [1] the piston does not move and [2] the piston moves.

[1] the piston does not move. If I am holding the piston from the other side so that it can't move then no work is done since W=Fd. This means that none of the potential energy from the gas is transferred to the piston. However, it is worth noting that there is a force applied due to the potential energy in the gas. So in this sense you are correct, the force was due to the energy stored in the gas. However, what physicist are usually interested in is whether energy is transferred (work done) and here it was not so W=0.

[2] the piston moves. This is the more interesting case. If I let go of the piston it now moves some distance and work is done. This means that the energy is transferred from the gas to the piston and the work done is W=Fd.
 
  • #65
russ_watters said:
You should be self-aware enough to accept that when multiple people have trouble with your use of a pretty basic concept, it's probably not everyone else who has the problem, but you.
probability not certainity
 
  • #66
DaleSpam said:
Obviously we cannot "count" your presence if we are only allowed to infer your presence due to motion of the wall and you do not move the wall. So what? That is entirely due to the restriction that we are only allowed to infer your presence from the motion of the wall, and has nothing directly to do with energy.

Why do you consider that at all relevant or important to a discussion on energy?

well think more and you will get a change in perception to your "so what"
 
  • #67
So you don't have any actual logical reason why your scenario is either relevant or important to a discussion on energy.
 
  • #68
nouveau - does galtsgulchb's post at the end of the last page answer your question?
 

Similar threads

High School How does an object gain potential energy?
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
6K
High School Conceptually understanding change in potential energy with 0 net work
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
High School Work Done By Conservative Forces
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School Using energy principles to find equilibrium depth of floating object
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
751
Undergrad What is the zero point for Potential Energy and how to find it from integral limits?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
High School Curious about Work and Energy Consumption
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Undergrad The far reaching ramifications of the work-energy theorem
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
High School Formal definition of work done
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
3K
Undergrad Hamilton’s principle maximises potential energy?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
High School The work done by two objects on each other
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
4K