B Work Done By Conservative Forces

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter Heisenberg7
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Forces Work
AI Thread Summary
Work done by conservative forces is defined as the negative change in potential energy, expressed mathematically as W_c = -ΔU. This relationship connects to the work-energy theorem, which states that the change in kinetic energy (ΔK) is equal to the work done on an object. In scenarios where only conservative forces, like gravity, are acting, the work done translates directly into changes in kinetic energy. For example, when a mass falls, the work done by gravity increases its kinetic energy while decreasing its potential energy, illustrating the connection between these concepts. Understanding this relationship helps clarify how energy is conserved in mechanical systems.
Heisenberg7
Messages
101
Reaction score
18
I did classical mechanics a while ago and I was going over some stuff that I wasn't sure if I understood correctly and now I've come over this one. It says that work done by conservative forces is equal to the negative difference in potential energy. Or, ##W_c = - \Delta U##. And I've really been trying to make sense of this. I know that when energy is conserved we have ##\Delta E = 0 \implies \Delta K + \Delta U = 0 \implies \Delta K = - \Delta U##. Does that have something to do with this equation? Would that also mean that work done by conservative forces is equal to the change in kinetic energy? What I am thinking: It kind of does make sense. Let's say we have a conservative force. Then work done by it is ##W_c = \int_{a}^{b} \vec{F} \cdot \vec{dl}##. If ##W_c > 0## then it helps object's motion so work done by it would actually increase object's velocity. So if there are no other forces, all the work done would go into change of kinetic energy. But how does that relate to the change in potential energy? I would just like to hear a kind of intuitive argument to why this connects to the previous equation (##\Delta K = - \Delta U##) if I'm right. Not just mathematically, but an example.

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
One of the ways a conservative force ##\mathbf F## is defined is that it can be derived by a scalar potential energy ##U##. In three dimensions, one would write $$\mathbf F=-\mathbf{\nabla}U.$$ So it's a matter of definition. Note that you can the potential energy if you know the force using a line integral, $$U(\mathbf r)=-\int_{\mathbf{r}_{\text{ref}}}^{\mathbf r}\mathbf F\cdot d\mathbf r$$where ##{\mathbf{r}_{\text{ref}}}## is the point where the potential energy is assumed to be zero.

Consider this example. A mass fall from rest and hits the floor at distance ##h## below. Find the landing speed of the mass.

You can use the work-energy theorem and say that the change in kinetic energy of the mass is equal to the net work done on it. Here gravity is the only force that does work. So you write $$\begin{align}
& \Delta K=W_{\text{grav}} \nonumber \\
& \left(\frac{1}{2}mv^2-0\right)=mgh.
\end{align}$$If you want to use energy considerations, you would write
$$\begin{align}
& \Delta K+\Delta U=0 \nonumber \\
& \left(\frac{1}{2}mv^2-0\right)+\left(0-mgh\right) =0.
\end{align}$$ Equations (1) and (2) are algebraically identical. However, the work done by gravity on the right side of equation (1) becomes the negative of the change in potential energy on the left side of equation (2).
 
  • Like
Likes Heisenberg7
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
54
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
48
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Back
Top