Why can we add/subtract constants to potential function?

AI Thread Summary
Adding or subtracting a constant to a potential energy function V(x) is permissible because the equations of quantum mechanics and classical physics are invariant under changes in the zero of energy. This adjustment is primarily a matter of convenience, allowing for easier calculations without affecting the outcomes. For example, in a harmonic oscillator, the potential is often set to zero at its minimum, while in the hydrogen atom, it is set at infinity. Physically, this constant adjustment does not correspond to any measurable change, as it does not alter the force derived from the potential. Ultimately, the choice of zero is based on convention rather than physical necessity.
MrApex
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
I have 3 questions regarding the topic:
1-Why is that we are allowed to add or subtract a constant to a potential energy function V(x) to set it to zero where it is constant?
2-What does adding/subtracting a constant physically correspond to if anything at all?
3- Do we do it simply for convenience ?

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The equations of QM (and for that matter, classical physics also) are invariant under a change of the zero of energy. All calculations will give the same result, whatever your choice of origin for energy. Therefore, it is only a matter of convenience where to set it.

For the harmonic oscillator, one usually takes the minimum of the potential to be at zero, while for the Coulomb potential in the hydrogen atom, one usually takes the zero to correspond to infinitely separated proton and electron, such that the ground state is at -13.6 eV.
 
  • Like
Likes MrApex
One way to think about this is that potential energy isn't something that is directly measurable. But force is something that we can measure directly. The potential is defined as the negative spatial derivative of the force. The derivative of a constant term is zero. It follows that we can add a constant term to the potential without changing our characterization of the force. "Physically", adding or subtracting a constant corresponds to nothing at all, since it has no effect on the "physically apprehensible" force. We just pick our zero for convenience and convention.
 
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...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
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?
Back
Top