Why why why is Potential Energy equal to Kinetic Energy in this problem?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding why potential energy (PE) equals kinetic energy (KE) in the context of a swinging child. It emphasizes the conservation of mechanical energy, where the total energy at the highest point (PEA) equals the total energy at the lowest point (KEB). The angle of 28 degrees is used to calculate the height from which the child swings, affecting the potential energy. The calculations show how to determine energy lost to friction by comparing initial and final kinetic energies. Overall, the problem illustrates the principles of energy conservation and the importance of geometry in calculating height changes.
riseofphoenix
Messages
294
Reaction score
2
Why why why is Potential Energy equal to Kinetic Energy in this problem??

A 31.0 kg child on a 3.00 m long swing is released from rest?
when the ropes of the the swing make an angle of 28.0° with the vertical

(a) Neglecting friction, find the child's speed at the lowest position.____m/s

potential energy = kinetic energy
mgh = 1/2 mv2
0.35 * 9.8 = 0.5 v2
v = √(2*9.8*0.35)
v = 2.62 m/s (without friction)


^^^^^^^

Why did they set potential energy equal to kinetic energy? I don't understand :(
 
Physics news on Phys.org


riseofphoenix said:
Why did they set potential energy equal to kinetic energy? I don't understand :(
Mechanical energy is conserved:

KEA + PEA = KEB + PEB

Let A be the highest point, where the swing is released. Thus, KEA = 0.

If you measure PE from the lowest point (point B), then PEB = 0.

That gives you:

PEA = KEB
 


Doc Al said:
Mechanical energy is conserved:

KEA + PEA = KEB + PEB

Let A be the highest point, where the swing is released. Thus, KEA = 0.

If you measure PE from the lowest point (point B), then PEB = 0.

That gives you:

PEA = KEB

What do you mean by "mechanical energy" though?
 


riseofphoenix said:
What do you mean by "mechanical energy" though?
Mechanical energy means the sum of KE + PE.

I assume you've been studying conservation of energy?
 


Yes but I'm a little confused...ok so...

The girl is swinging.

When the swing is at an angle of 28 degrees, (slow mo) she stops, and at that point you have potential energy...

When the swing moves forward again you no longer have potential energy (PE = 0), but this time, you have Kinetic energy...So, essentially, this problem deals with the law of conservation of energy, right? which is:

PEA + [STRIKE]KEA [/STRIKE]= [STRIKE]PEB[/STRIKE] + KEB

So that's why, PEA = KEB, right?
Which is,

mgh = (1/2)mv2

Right?

If so, then what do I did with the angle (theta) that they gave me? Where does that go in the equation above?
 
Last edited:


riseofphoenix said:
So, essentially, this problem deals with the law of conservation of energy, right? which is:

PEA + [STRIKE]KEA [/STRIKE]= [STRIKE]PEB[/STRIKE] + KEB

So that's why, PEA = KEB, right?
Right.

Which is,

(1/2)kx2 = (1/2)mv2

Right?
No, not right. The potential energy here is gravitational PE (mgh) not spring PE (which is 1/2kx2). No springs in this problem!
If so, then what do I did with the angle (theta) that they gave me? Where does that go in the equation above?
Once you have the correct expression for PE, you'll need the angle to figure out the height of the initial position.
 


mgh(1 - cos 28) = (1/2)mv2

I looked that up :(
Now my question is, would it ALWAYS be h(1 - cos θ) whenever I have a problem like this?
 


Sorry if I'm asking so many questions - I'm just trying to figure out how these things relate to each other so that I can go about answering any question like this!

Part b says:

If the speed of the child at the lowest position is 2.30 m/s, what is the mechanical energy lost due to friction?

What they did:

KE @ 2.62 m/sec = (1/2)(31)(2.62)^2 = 106.68 J

KE @ 2.30 m/sec = (1/2)(31)(2.30)^2 = 81.995 J

Therefore, energy lost to friction = 106.68 - 81.995 = 24.685 J

^^^^^^

My question is, how did they know to just subtract KE with v=2.30 by KE with 2.62?
 


riseofphoenix said:
mgh(1 - cos 28) = (1/2)mv2

I looked that up :(
Now my question is, would it ALWAYS be h(1 - cos θ) whenever I have a problem like this?
That depends on just how 'like' the problem is, doesn't it? Get the concept: To find the change in gravitational PE, you may need to determine the change in height. By whatever means necessary.
 
  • #10


riseofphoenix said:
My question is, how did they know to just subtract KE with v=2.30 by KE with 2.62?
They are really subtracting final energy from initial energy:

Initial Energy (at top) = Final Energy (at bottom) + Energy lost to friction
 
  • #11


riseofphoenix said:
mgh(1 - cos 28) = (1/2)mv2

I looked that up :(
Now my question is, would it ALWAYS be h(1 - cos θ) whenever I have a problem like this?

No, that comes from the geometry of the problem.

In general.. ΔPE = mgΔh

So you need to work out the change in height (Δh) using whatever information is given in the problem. You might have a similar problem where θ is specified differently. If in doubt make your own drawing.
 
Back
Top