Gravitational Potential Energy: A Basic Explanation

AI Thread Summary
Gravitational potential energy (GPE) is defined as the negative of the work done when bringing an object from infinity to a point in a gravitational field, represented mathematically as PE = -∫ F.dr. This negative sign is crucial for aligning with the work-energy theorem, ensuring that potential energy reflects the attractive nature of gravitational forces. In the case of a point source, GPE is calculated as -G m M / r, where G is the gravitational constant, m is the mass of the object, and M is the mass of the source. Using infinity as a reference point is logical, as the potential energy approaches zero at infinite distance. Therefore, all GPE values at finite distances from a gravitational source are negative.
ian2012
Messages
77
Reaction score
0
A very basic question:

Why is the definition of gravitational potential energy, bringing an object from infinity (or any point of reference) to zero, the negative of the line integral of F.dr ? I am assuming since potential energy in an attractive field , which is defined to be negative, the integral was fixed to lead to this result... or is there a more mathematical reason?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi ian2012! :smile:

potential energy (gravitational electric or whatever) is defined as minus the work done …

and work done = integral of force "dot" displacement …

so PE = -W = -∫ F.dr :wink:

(and it has to be minus so that the work-energy theorem works)
 
thank you for your post
 
ian2012 said:
Object infinity zero
In the case of gravity from a point source, potential energy = -G m M / r. Because of this, using infinity as a reference point makes since, becaue - G m M / ∞ = 0, and all GPE's at finite distances from a gravitational point source would be negative.
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top