Work done by gravity - what is wrong?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of work done by gravity on a mass attached to a weightless, rigid rod. Participants explore the mathematical formulation of work in the context of gravitational force and potential energy, examining the implications of the path taken in the integration process.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the integral formulation for work done by gravity, noting that the integral yields a negative value based on their calculations.
  • Another participant suggests that the work done by gravity is independent of the path taken and relates it to the change in potential energy, asserting that the work should be positive due to the direction of the gravitational force and displacement.
  • A later reply acknowledges a potential error in the integration process, indicating that the differential element of the angle was considered negative, which may have led to the confusion about the sign of the work done.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the correct approach to calculating the work done by gravity. Some participants argue for the independence of the path in determining work, while others focus on the specifics of the integration process and its implications.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the integration limits and the relationship between the gravitational force and the path of integration. The discussion highlights the dependence on the definitions used in the calculations and the assumptions made about the direction of the variables involved.

Zoli
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
I would like the determine the work done by gravity on a mass attached to a rod (see the attached image). The rod is assumed to be weightless and rigid.
I start from the definition of work:
[tex]W_{AB} = \int_{\mathbf{r}_A}^{\mathbf{r}_B} \mathbf{G}\cdot \mathrm{d}\,\mathbf{r}.[/tex]
In the x-y coordinate system we can write
[tex]\mathbf{G} = G(0,-1), \quad \mathrm{d}\,\mathbf{r} = R(\sin\varphi,-\cos\varphi)\mathrm{d}\,\varphi,[/tex]
k4xmpv.png

therefore the value of the integral becomes [itex]W_{AB} = GR(\sin\varphi_B - \sin\varphi_A),[/itex] which is negative since we are in the first quadrant. However, if we look at the attached draft, we may notice that the angle between [itex]W_{AB} = \mathbf{G}[/itex] and [itex]\mathrm{d}\,\mathbf{r}[/itex] is an acute angle, so the work should be positive.
What have I done wrong?

Thank you, Zoli
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You tried it the hard way and in so doing, looks like you integrated backwards. The easier way is to note that the work done by gravity is independent of the path taken, and equal to the negative of the potential energy change. You can calculate the potential energy from basic trig to determine the vertical height change. Since the gravity force and it's vertical displacement are in same direction, work must be positive.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Zoli
I see it. It should be noticed that dr=-R(sinφ,−cosφ)dφ,becasue from A to B dφ is negative.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Zoli and Nugatory
PhanthomJay said:
You tried it the hard way and in so doing, looks like you integrated backwards. The easier way is to note that the work done by gravity is independent of the path taken, and equal to the negative of the potential energy change. You can calculate the potential energy from basic trig to determine the vertical height change. Since the gravity force and it's vertical displacement are in same direction, work must be positive.
Yes, I surmised that I changed the path of integration, since [itex]\mathrm{d}\,\varphi[/itex] is negative. I forgot the idea of the potential function. Thank you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
18K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K