Where does the K.E go? [RotMech]

  • Thread starter Thread starter rohanprabhu
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a boy on a rotating platform who stretches his arms, doubling the system's moment of inertia and affecting its kinetic energy. Using conservation of angular momentum, it is determined that the new angular velocity is half of the initial, leading to a new kinetic energy that is one-fourth of the original. The participants debate where the lost kinetic energy goes, with suggestions that the boy's work in extending his arms translates into energy loss, possibly as heat or other forms of non-conservative work. They conclude that while the system's mechanical energy is not conserved due to the boy's actions, the energy is accounted for by the work done on the system. The conversation highlights the complexities of energy transformations in rotating systems.
rohanprabhu
Messages
410
Reaction score
2
Got this question somewhere: A boy is standing on a rotating platform. The system has a kinetic energy 'K'. Now, the boy stretches out is hand such that the Moment of Inertia of the system doubles. What is the Kinetic Energy of the system?

So.. i first applied conservation of angular momentum,

<br /> I\omega_1 = 2I\omega_2<br />

(here, \omega_1 and \omega_2 are the angular velocities before & after he stretches his hands).

So, we have:

<br /> \omega_2 = \frac{\omega_1}{2}<br />

Also,

<br /> K = \frac{1}{2}{\omega_1}^2<br />

and the new kinetic energy is:

<br /> K_2= \frac{1}{2}{\omega_2}^2 = \frac{1}{8}{\omega_1}^2<br />

So, the energy difference is:

<br /> K - K_2 = \frac{3}{8}{\omega_1}^2<br />

So.. where exactly does this energy go? By COE, this needs to be translated to the potential energy.. but does something called 'Rotational Potential Energy' even exist? How do i calculate it if it does?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
erm the kinetic energy of a rotation is 1/2I*w^2
 
rohanprabhu said:
Got this question somewhere: A boy is standing on a rotating platform. The system has a kinetic energy 'K'. Now, the boy stretches out is hand such that the Moment of Inertia of the system doubles. What is the Kinetic Energy of the system?

So.. i first applied conservation of angular momentum,

<br /> I\omega_1 = 2I\omega_2<br />

(here, \omega_1 and \omega_2 are the angular velocities before & after he stretches his hands).

So, we have:

<br /> \omega_2 = \frac{\omega_1}{2}<br />
OK. Let's at least imagine that he's holding weights in his hands or something to give him a bit of rotational inertia to play with.

Also,

<br /> K = \frac{1}{2}{\omega_1}^2<br />
That should be:
K_1 = \frac{1}{2}I{\omega_1}^2
and the new kinetic energy is:

<br /> K_2= \frac{1}{2}{\omega_2}^2 = \frac{1}{8}{\omega_1}^2<br />
That should be:
K_2 = \frac{1}{2}I_2{\omega_2}^2 = \frac{1}{2}( \frac{1}{2}I{\omega_1}^2)


So, the energy difference is:

<br /> K - K_2 = \frac{3}{8}{\omega_1}^2<br />
K_2 = \frac{1}{2} K_1
So.. where exactly does this energy go? By COE, this needs to be translated to the potential energy.. but does something called 'Rotational Potential Energy' even exist? How do i calculate it if it does?
Mechanical energy is not conserved. (Consider the work he must do as he extends his hands.)
 
Doc Al said:
OK. Let's at least imagine that he's holding weights in his hands or something to give him a bit of rotational inertia to play with.

That should be:
K_2 = \frac{1}{2}I_2{\omega_2}^2 = \frac{1}{2}( \frac{1}{2}I{\omega_1}^2)

K_2 = \frac{1}{2} K_1

Mechanical energy is not conserved. (Consider the work he must do as he extends his hands.)

umm.. right.. i made that slip there.. it's not 1/4th but half of the K.E. but that apart, you mean to say that the work done by the boy to move his hands apart equals the difference [taking the general assumptions of no air friction and such] of the 2 kinetic energies? So, if he brings his hands back together, the work done will translate into kinetic energy again and bring it back to the previous kinetic energy 'K'.

But here, the boy has done work.. but still the system remains unchanged. Where does the energy consumed by the boy go?

By Work energy theorem, the change in Kinetic energy is given by the total work done. Which means, the work done in this case is zero??

Could somebody please clarify this a little bit..
 
well, in that case, i guess the boy applied two non-conservative forces, making the system to apparently(literally) conserve itself...

Whoever, energy was lost to the boy make that movements. In general, Men system are non conservative, as it was a great process to make him move(or being alive), heat is only one of the K.E. lost...
 
rohanprabhu said:
umm.. right.. i made that slip there.. it's not 1/4th but half of the K.E. but that apart, you mean to say that the work done by the boy to move his hands apart equals the difference [taking the general assumptions of no air friction and such] of the 2 kinetic energies? So, if he brings his hands back together, the work done will translate into kinetic energy again and bring it back to the previous kinetic energy 'K'.

But here, the boy has done work.. but still the system remains unchanged. Where does the energy consumed by the boy go?

By Work energy theorem, the change in Kinetic energy is given by the total work done. Which means, the work done in this case is zero??

Could somebody please clarify this a little bit..
When he brings his hands back, he makes mechanical work to the system, which then increases its kinetic energy; when he let's his hands moving apart, the work he makes on the system is negative, that is, the system makes work on him.

Think of a stretched spring connected with the two masses: when the spring is released and can contract making the massess approach, its previous elastic potential energy is converted into system's kinetic energy; if you instead had a non-stretched spring, then centrifugal force makes it stretch and system's kinetic energy is converted into spring potential energy.
(There are no tricks! Energy is neither created nor destroyed!)
 
Last edited:
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