Physics Help Forum Energy Transformation

 Kinematics and Dynamics Kinematics and Dynamics Physics Help Forum

 May 17th 2017, 05:56 AM #1 Junior Member   Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Turkey Posts: 15 Energy Transformation Greetings to all This is my first post in this nice forum , my question is : In any system , is it physically possible to have a situation where E - U < 0 ?? where , E : the total energy for this system . U : the potential energy for this system . Note : mathematically i have proved that it is impossible , but what about Physically ? Thanks in advance and best regards. Razi
May 17th 2017, 06:56 AM   #2
Senior Member

Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Somerset, England
Posts: 688
 Originally Posted by Razi Greetings to all This is my first post in this nice forum , my question is : In any system , is it physically possible to have a situation where E - U < 0 ?? where , E : the total energy for this system . U : the potential energy for this system . Note : mathematically i have proved that it is impossible , but what about Physically ? Thanks in advance and best regards. Razi
This is going to depend in part on your definition of E and U, your sign convention and the timescale of the process.

 May 17th 2017, 07:09 AM #3 Junior Member   Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Turkey Posts: 15 Dear Studiot Thanks for replay , about the E it is the total mechanical energy for a conservative system which is equal to : E = K + U K : Kinetic Energy , U : Potential Energy , mathematically , E - U = K = (1/2)mv^2 always (+ve) >0 because (1/2) is +ve , m is scalar quantity and always +ve , v^2 is always +ve , so the kinetic energy , mathematically is > 0 . Is there any case in the nature for E - U < 0 ?? ( Physically )? this is my question . Best regards Razi
 May 17th 2017, 08:21 AM #4 Junior Member   Join Date: May 2017 Posts: 12 is the E the same as the E in E=m/(c)(c)?
 May 17th 2017, 09:43 AM #5 Junior Member   Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Turkey Posts: 15 No , it is not energy equivalent to mass , it is just the total mechanical energy :-)
 May 17th 2017, 01:18 PM #6 Senior Member   Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Somerset, England Posts: 688 I will have time to write a longer piece tomorrow but here is something to think about. Thank you for the clarification. I don't know where your data comes from but as I said things depend upon your definitions and sign conventions. For instance gravitational potential energy is defined as $\displaystyle U = - G\frac{{Mm}}{r}$ Notice the negative sign which is the convention that allows the potential energy to tend towards zero at very large distances. As regards kinetic energy your formula is incomplete as is only takes account of the translational energy of a body. Rigid bodies or systems of particles may also have rotational kinetic energy. The complete formula is $\displaystyle KE = \frac{1}{2}m{v^2} + \frac{1}{2}I{\omega ^2}$
 May 17th 2017, 01:40 PM #7 Junior Member   Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Turkey Posts: 15 Thanks again for your replay and for your time I am studying physics by using very famous book : " Physics for scientists and engineers with modern physics , 5th ed. " i have found this question in the question section of chapter 8 , page : 239 , question number 9 . fortunately , till now i am just studying the linear motion , so the rotational motion will be in the next chapters so we can ignore the value of ( 1/2 ) Iw^2 right now . Physically , i could not find ( as i know ) any case matched with this hypothesis so i have asked you :-) . I will wait your answer , and thanks again so much Best regards Razi Attached Thumbnails
 May 17th 2017, 01:44 PM #8 Junior Member   Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Turkey Posts: 15 Thanks again for your replay and for your time I am studying physics by using very famous book : " Physics for scientists and engineers with modern physics , 5th ed. " i have found this question in the question section of chapter 8 , page : 239 , question number 9 . fortunately , till now i am just studying the linear motion , so the rotational motion will be in the next chapters so we can ignore the value of ( 1/2 ) Iw^2 right now . Physically , i could not find ( as i know ) any case matched with this hypothesis so i have asked you :-) . I will wait your answer , and thanks again so much Best regards Razi kavinmathi likes this.

 Tags energy, transformation

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Similar Physics Forum Discussions Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post thinhnghiem Light and Optics 1 Aug 30th 2016 10:51 AM jcocker Energy and Work 6 May 2nd 2016 10:55 AM mooshazz Electricity and Magnetism 1 May 18th 2013 08:31 AM rosalia General Physics 0 Apr 22nd 2009 10:49 AM Mashfique General Physics 2 Mar 9th 2009 09:56 PM