Energy and roller coaster question

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the height of the initial hill of a roller coaster using conservation of energy principles. The user initially attempts to apply the formulas for potential and kinetic energy but struggles to arrive at a logical answer. After some guidance, they realize that their equation should include a positive sign instead of a negative, reflecting the conservation of energy correctly. The corrected approach leads to a more accurate understanding of the relationship between the heights and speeds involved. Ultimately, the importance of correctly applying energy conservation principles is emphasized in solving such problems.
enapper
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
A roller coaster starts at height (h). It goes down this hill and then goes up a second hill that is at a height of 28.5 m at a speed of 15.8 m/s. How high was the initial hill?


Given equations:
U=mgh
KE=1/2mv^2
W=Fd
P=W/T



Honestly, we've never done a problem like this before and I'm unsure how to solve it. I know potential energy is at it's highest point at the peak of the first hill and that energy is always conserved, so I said mgh(1)-1/2mv^2(1)=mgh(2)-1/2mv^2, but I didn't get a logical answer. Can anyone help me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
welcome to pf!

hi enapper! welcome to pf! :smile:

(try using the X2 and X2 icons just above the Reply box :wink:)

your formula should work …

show us your full calculations, and then we'll see what went wrong :smile:
 
Thanks!

mgh=mgh(2)-1/2mv^2(2)

I canceled out the mass because it should be the same throughout the equation and no mass is given, leaving me with:
gh=gh(sub2)-1/2v^2(sub2)

(9.8)(h)=(9.8)(28.5)-(1/2)(15.8)^2

9.8h=279.3-124.82

h=154.48/9.8

h=15.76

This answer seems illogical, though, because normally the cart would not be able to exceed the initial height, and the second hill is much higher than 15.76m.
 
oh, on second thoughts your formula was wrong …

it should have a + not a - …

conservation of energy is KE + PE = constant :wink:
 
That makes sense. "The whole is equal to the sum of the parts" sort of thing.
Thanks a million!
 
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 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Back
Top