Conservation of Energy and calculating potential energy?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the gravitational potential energy (U) of a rock before it slides down a hill. The key formula for potential energy is U = mgh, where m is mass, g is gravitational acceleration, and h is height. The length of the hillside and the coefficient of kinetic friction are deemed irrelevant for this calculation, as they do not affect the initial potential energy. The conversation emphasizes that potential energy depends solely on the height from which the rock is falling and not on the path taken. Ultimately, the correct approach is to use the formula U = mgh to determine the potential energy just before the rock slides.
suspenc3
Messages
400
Reaction score
0
during a rockslide a 520kg rock slides from rest down a hillside that is 500m long and 300m high. The coeeficient of kinetic friction is 0.25. If the gravitational potential energy U of the rock-earth system is zero at the bottom of the hill, what is the value of U just beofre it slides?

I know this is wrong, but I tried:

U_g = mghcos \Theta
U_g = 9.2 x 10^5J

What do I do?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is a good question. There is too much information given in the problem. Specifically, neither the length of the hillside nor the coefficient of friction are important. The gravitational potential energy is just U = mgh. The statement about U = 0 at the bottom of the hill just establishes that h = 0 at the bottom of the hill (since m and g are never 0).

The important part is: do you understand why the friction and length are unimportant in this question?

-Dale
 
Last edited:
well friction wouldn't matter because it only has to do with thermal energy?

but there are more parts to the question, that is why a lot of the info seems useless.

Why doesn't the angle come into play when calculating potential energy?
 
suspenc3 said:
well friction wouldn't matter because it only has to do with thermal energy?
but there are more parts to the question, that is why a lot of the info seems useless.
Why doesn't the angle come into play when calculating potential energy?

Potential energy is the energy a mass has at rest, potentially it could fall and turn that energy into kinetic energy. change in U is = change in K [conservation of energy] U doesn't even care about any angles because there is no angle involved with a rock sitting in one place.
 
That and also gravity is a conservative field. Meaning that the path you take (the angle) is irrelevant, only the change in the potential is important.

Suspenc3, you hit the key idea about the friction. Basically, if it were frictionless than all of the PE at the top would go into KE at the bottom. With the friction some of the PE will go to heat and some will go to KE, but the initial PE is still the same.

-Dale
 
Ya..Other information are irrelevent.
You can simply use mgh to find the change in GPE, then add it to zero.. U shld get an answer.
 
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Struggling to make relation between elastic force and height'
Hello guys this is what I tried so far. I used the UTS to calculate the force it needs when the rope tears. My idea was to make a relationship/ function that would give me the force depending on height. Yeah i couldnt find a way to solve it. I also thought about how I could use hooks law (how it was given to me in my script) with the thought of instead of having two part of a rope id have one singular rope from the middle to the top where I could find the difference in height. But the...
Back
Top