Work: Isolated & Non-Isolated Systems Difference

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of isolated and non-isolated systems in the context of work and energy, as presented in a textbook. Participants explore definitions, applications, and the implications of these concepts in problem-solving, particularly in physics exercises involving potential energy.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion over the definitions of isolated and non-isolated systems, noting contradictions in their textbook regarding examples of each.
  • Another participant confirms the distinction, stating that an isolated system contains only internal forces, while a non-isolated system has external forces acting on it.
  • Discussion includes the idea that work is a transfer of energy, with internal forces redistributing energy within a system and external forces allowing energy to enter or leave the system.
  • A participant raises a question about setting gravitational potential energy (Ug) to zero at different points for different objects in a problem, recalling a high school understanding that typically only one reference point is used.
  • Responses indicate that differences in potential energy are what matter, and participants agree that setting Ug to zero at multiple points is acceptable as it simplifies calculations.
  • Some participants suggest that while it is permissible to set Ug at different points, consistency might help avoid confusion in calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the definitions of isolated and non-isolated systems and the treatment of potential energy in calculations. However, there is some uncertainty regarding the best practices for setting reference points for potential energy, with differing preferences expressed.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of the textbook material and the potential for confusion arising from multiple definitions and contexts in which work and energy are discussed.

Who May Find This Useful

Students studying physics, particularly those grappling with concepts of work, energy, and system classifications in their coursework.

Const@ntine
Messages
285
Reaction score
18
Okay, so I've reached the Work Chapters in my textbook, and I've noticed some contradictions, especially in what consists (and what doesn't) an Isolated System, plus the external and/or applied forces.

For example, in one of the "Speed Questions" it categorizes a single cube as a non-isolated system, the surface as a non-isolated system, and the cube/surface (there is friction) as an isolated system. Later, in an exercise, it describes a cube/surface system with friction as a non-isolated system.

The problem is, it's got a ton of formulas that he constructs, reconstructs, renames and whatnot, and it's confused the hell out of me. From what I gathered, an isolated system is something that each force exists within (eg a cube, the surface and the earth), and a non-isolated one is something that each (or some) force(s) is/are external (eg just a cube, where the force that the Earth exerts onto it is external).

Can anybody plainly explain to me the nature of those systems, external/applied forces, and how work fits in all this? I mean, I've got about 50 or so equations and formulas at this point, with most of them lumped together and reconstructed in every page. I've memorized most of the formulas and mostly know how to use them in the various exercises, but I'm kinda lost as to why I'm using them. Things were pretty clear fro my High School studies, and I never had any particular trouble with Work and the like, but this book (Physics for Engineers and Scientists, 8th Edition)has confused me a bit.

I'd really appreciate it if someone could go over the basics briefly.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Darthkostis said:
an isolated system is something that each force exists within (eg a cube, the surface and the earth), and a non-isolated one is something that each (or some) force(s) is/are external
Yes, this is exactly the difference.

Darthkostis said:
hysics for Engineers and Scientists, 8th Edition
By Serway?

Darthkostis said:
external/applied forces, and how work fits in all this?
So work is a transfer of energy. If the forces are internal then work just moves energy around within the system. If a force is external, then energy can leave or enter the system via the external force.
 
Dale said:
Yes, this is exactly the difference.

Well, that's good, at least I've got that down.

Dale said:
By Serway?

Yeah.

Dale said:
So work is a transfer of energy. If the forces are internal then work just moves energy around within the system. If a force is external, then energy can leave or enter the system via the external force.

Okay, yeah, I get that. But, for example, in some exercises I see that he sets two different "places" where Ug = 0, one for each object. So, for example, let's say there are two cubes. One is stationed at a reclining surface, and the other is on top of a spring, that is stationed vertically.Both are connected with a weightless rope. We pull the first cube by h, and let him go (Vi = 0). So, when it's time to do the exercise, he says that Ug = 0 in two ocasions: One, when the cube on the reclining surface is dragged/pulled back by h, and two, when the second cube is back at its original place (on top of the spring, which is unstreched).

Can we do that? From high school, I knew that you could just pick one place where Ug was 0. I'd never seen a problem where you could set two places.
 
All that matters is differences in potential energy. If you want to set Ug equal to 0 for both at the same time then that is fine too. You will just get a constant on both sides that cancels out. The author is just recognizing that and setting that canceling term to 0 in advance.
 
Dale said:
All that matters is differences in potential energy. If you want to set Ug equal to 0 for both at the same time then that is fine too. You will just get a constant on both sides that cancels out. The author is just recognizing that and setting that canceling term to 0 in advance.

So, for each object, I'm free to set Ug zero as I see fit.
 
Darthkostis said:
So, for each object, I'm free to set Ug zero as I see fit.
If you ever think that you need to set Ug at some place then don't hesitate to do so. If you were free to set it somewhere else then it will drop out automatically. Personally, I would have set them to the same to be safe. I would have carried an extra term in my intermediate calculations, but I would rather do that than confuse myself
 
Dale said:
If you ever think that you need to set Ug at some place then don't hesitate to do so. If you were free to set it somewhere else then it will drop out automatically. Personally, I would have set them to the same to be safe. I would have carried an extra term in my intermediate calculations, but I would rather do that than confuse myself

Okay, thanks for the info! These last few chapters are kinda tricky, but as I progress, through the exercises, things become more clear. Now if only I had more time...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 77 ·
3
Replies
77
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
12K