Why Is Momentum Conserved but Not Kinetic Energy in an Inelastic Collision?

AI Thread Summary
Momentum is conserved in inelastic collisions due to the principles outlined in Newton's third law, while kinetic energy is not conserved because it can be transformed into other forms of energy like heat and sound. Inelastic collisions are characterized by a loss of kinetic energy, which is defined by the objects not retaining their initial kinetic energy post-collision. Perfectly inelastic collisions represent a scenario where the colliding objects stick together, resulting in the maximum loss of kinetic energy. Despite the loss of kinetic energy, the total energy remains conserved throughout the process. Ultimately, momentum persists before and after the collision, highlighting its fundamental nature in physics.
bolbol2054
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
why although the equations of momentum and kinetic energy of an object contains the same symbols m and v we note in an inelastic collision that momentum unlike the kinetic energy is conserved
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Momentum will always be conserved because of the symmetry regarding Newton III. But kinetic energy does not need to be conserved because it can easily be transformed into heat, sound, deformation, etc. Note that the total energy still is conserved, just not kinetic energy. Moreover, inelastic collisions are defined by us to be a collision which does not conserve kinetic energy much like perfectly inelastic collisions are defined to be a collision where the final two objects "stick" together resulting in the maximum loss in kinetic energy.
 
The kinetic energy is converted into other forms of energy. It all starts or ends with the motion of the body.

The momentum, whereas, is always there, before collision, after collision.
 
that's now clear thank you
 
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