Finding Total Energy Of A System | Physics Forums

• Insights Blog -- Browse All Articles -- Physics Articles Math Articles Education Articles Bio/Chem/Tech Articles
• Forums Intro Physics Homework Help Advanced Physics Homework Help Precalculus Homework Help Calculus Homework Help Bio/Chem Homework Help Engineering Homework Help
• Trending

Log in Register What's new

• Intro Physics Homework Help
• Advanced Physics Homework Help
• Precalculus Homework Help
• Calculus Homework Help
• Bio/Chem Homework Help
• Engineering Homework Help

Menu Log in Register Navigation More options Style variation System Light Dark Contact us Close Menu You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

• Forums
• Homework Help
• Introductory Physics Homework Help

Finding Total Energy of a system

• Thread starter Thread starter ctamasi
• Start date Start date Jun 18, 2009
• Tags Tags Energy System Total energy

Click For Summary SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the total energy of a frictionless roller coaster system with a mass of 12,000 kg starting from a height of 95 m. The total energy (ET) is determined to be 1.1×107 Joules, derived solely from potential energy at the initial height. As the coaster descends to a height of 65 m, the kinetic energy (EK) is calculated using the conservation of energy principle, leading to a speed of 24.3 m/s at that point. The conversation emphasizes the importance of defining a reference plane for potential energy calculations and clarifies that total energy is conserved regardless of the chosen reference point.

PREREQUISITES

• Understanding of potential energy (PE) and kinetic energy (KE) concepts
• Familiarity with the conservation of energy principle
• Basic knowledge of physics equations, specifically ET = EK + EP
• Ability to manipulate algebraic equations for solving for variables

NEXT STEPS

• Study the conservation of mechanical energy in roller coaster dynamics
• Learn about the significance of reference frames in energy calculations
• Explore the relationship between height and speed in gravitational systems
• Investigate the implications of energy conservation in various physical systems

USEFUL FOR

Physics students, educators, and anyone interested in understanding energy dynamics in mechanical systems, particularly in the context of roller coasters and gravitational forces.

ctamasi Messages 26 Reaction score 0 Alright, the problem is fairly simple actually; however, I've seen a few methods to solve this that have kind of confused me. The questions is: Consider a frictionless roller coaster with a mass of 12,000kg. If the coaster starts at rest at point A, which is 95m above the ground, calculate the total energy of the system. My attempt at a solution: Since the coaster is at rest at point A, the total energy will simply be equal to the potential energy of the system; ET = EK + EP ET = \frac{mv^{2}}{2} + mgh ET = \frac{12000kg * 0m/s^{2}}{2} + (12000kg × 9.8N/kg × 95m) ET = EP ET = 1.1×107 Joules Therefore, the total energy of the system is 1.1×107 Joules. Now, the question asks: Calculate the total speed of the coaster at point B which is 65m above the ground (30m below point A). This is where I got confused. I was told that I could just find the potential energy of the system at this point and subtract it from the total energy found at Point A and use the kinetic energy formula to solve for speed. But I don't understand why I would subtract the energy at point A from the energy at point B. I figured I could just use the total energy formula and substitute in the new height (65m) and isolate the speed variable and solve: ET = \frac{mv^{2}}{2} + mgh v = \sqrt{\frac{E_{T} * 2 - 2gh}{m}} From this equation, I'm getting approximately 1.3m/s. Now that seems a bit low to me. If someone could clarify, or at least let me know if I'm on the right track that would be great. Thanks. Physics news on Phys.org

• Real-life experiment shows Niels Bohr was right in a theoretical debate with Einstein
• Physicists repair flaw of established quantum resource theorem
• Hunting for dark matter axions with a quantum-powered haloscope

RoyalCat Messages 670 Reaction score 2 You're missing an m. v=√((ET - mgh)*(2/m)) A simpler approach to follow would be to just move your plane of reference, to avoid getting mixed up in the math. If you define U=0 for h=65m, you have all the potential energy (Just 30 meters' potential, though) converted into kinetic energy, which simplifies the math considerably. U = mgh, with h being measured relative to the new plane of reference, you only get a factor of 30 (m). mgh = ½mv² --> v² = 2gh (This is a result you should remember, it'll come up a lot) Last edited: Jun 18, 2009 ctamasi Messages 26 Reaction score 0 Ooooh! Right. It's the same as using this formula: vf2 = vi2 + 2a\Deltad vf2 = (0 m/s)2 + 2(9.8 m/s2)(30m) vf = \sqrt{588 m^{2}/s^{2}} vf = 24.3 m/s Ok, so as the coaster decends to Earth's surface, it is losing potential energy, which is being transformed into kinetic energy. But one more thing I don't understand is that if I were to plug this value for speed into the kinetic energy formula, I get a pretty large number, larger than the potential energy of the system. This is not what I expected because the coaster has only dropped 30m, which is not even half-way. At half-way (47.5m), shouldn't it be expected that the potential and kinetic energies are equal? (First law of thermodynamics -- Total energy is constant in a system) Therefore, ET = EK + EP And I've already calculated the total energy of the system to be equal to the coaster's potential energy at point A; 1.1 * 107 Joules Substituting the value for speed found in the preceeding formula into the kinetic energy formula I get: EK = \frac{1}{2}mv2 EK = \frac{1}{2}(12000 kg)(24.3 m/s)2 EK = 3.5 * 109 Joules Clearly this is much larger than the total energy of the system. RoyalCat Messages 670 Reaction score 2 Be careful of that line of reasoning. The 'total energy' you started with is COMPLETELY arbitrary. But with 'height' energy, then there's a linear relationship between the height descended and the kinetic energy gained. At half-way, yes, you'd have half of the 'height' energy converted to kinetic energy, and you'd have half of the 'height' energy left, making U=Ek, because you've started with Ek=0 You made a calculation error. Ek = ½mv² = ½*(12000 kg)*(24.3 m/s)² = 3542940 J = 30/95 * Ug i ctamasi Messages 26 Reaction score 0 Ok I've made the correction; however, I'm still a bit confused with regards to saying that the total energy of the system is completely arbitrary. In what sense is it arbitrary? I was under the impression that that value was pretty significant. RoyalCat Messages 670 Reaction score 2

ctamasi said: Ok I've made the correction; however, I'm still a bit confused with regards to saying that the total energy of the system is completely arbitrary. In what sense is it arbitrary? I was under the impression that that value was pretty significant.

Only the difference between the initial and final state is significant. In choosing the plane of reference, you make an arbitrary choice. Sure, some are more convenient than others, but none are wrong. You could have set your plane of reference at the top just as well, the only things that matter are the invariant sizes, the differences in potential energy. ctamasi Messages 26 Reaction score 0 Ooooh I see. That makes a lot of sense. Then does that mean that the total energy that I found isn't in fact the total energy? Would the total energy then be the potential energy I found at point A + the kinetic energy I calculated at point B? RoyalCat Messages 670 Reaction score 2

ctamasi said: Ooooh I see. That makes a lot of sense. Then does that mean that the total energy that I found isn't in fact the total energy? Would the total energy then be the potential energy I found at point A + the kinetic energy I calculated at point B?

No. You define the total energy in reference to a certain plane of reference if you're using potential energy. 'Total energy' is conserved, in relation to that specific plane of reference. Take for example the following case: First, we set our plane of reference at the top of the roller-coaster (95m above ground-level). Etot i = Ug + Ek Etot i = 0 If we let it slide all the way down, we'll have kinetic energy, and negative 'height' energy: Etot f = -mg*h + ½mv² Since this has to equal 0, you can quickly see the following holds true: v² = 2gh You would get the exact same result regardless of your plane of reference since h is the height descended, and is invariant regardless of how you choose to look at things. Potential energy is a useful construct, but it is not necessary, it just makes things A LOT more simple. I think of it as the work a conservative force would perform on the object, translating it from its initial position to the plane of reference at an infinitesimal constant speed.

Similar threads

Energy & Momentum Homework: Frictionless Roller Coaster from A-E

• Jul 5, 2015 · Replies 7 · Jul 5, 2015

Replies 7 Views 1K Understanding the Work-Energy Theorem: Solving the Roller Coaster Problem

• Mar 13, 2021 · Replies 8 · Mar 13, 2021

Replies 8 Views 3K What is considered the "System" here? (conservation of energy problem)

• Jul 12, 2022 · Replies 20 · Jul 14, 2022

Replies 20 Views 3K Energy conservation equation to find equation for final velocity

• Aug 14, 2024 · Replies 4 · Aug 14, 2024

Replies 4 Views 1K A block dropping onto a spring system

• Feb 13, 2025 · Replies 58 · Feb 15, 2025

2 Replies 58 Views 3K Understanding the Bungee Jumper Problem: Energy Transformation and Calculations

• Dec 16, 2022 · Replies 44 · Dec 17, 2022

2 Replies 44 Views 6K Total energy of a mass hanging on a spring

• Feb 25, 2021 · Replies 12 · Feb 25, 2021

Replies 12 Views 3K Conservation of Mechanical Energy - Which Equation To Use?

• Jun 29, 2024 · Replies 9 · Jun 30, 2024

Replies 9 Views 1K How to calculate the total energy in the point given.

• Oct 3, 2017 · Replies 10 · Oct 3, 2017

Replies 10 Views 4K Energy analysis of this system (curved ramp up and a spring)

• Jun 19, 2024 · Replies 29 · Jun 21, 2024

Replies 29 Views 1K

• Forums
• Homework Help
• Introductory Physics Homework Help

Hot Threads

• N

  Chain falling out of a horizontal tube onto a table

  • Started by NTesla
  • Nov 4, 2025
  • Replies: 100
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
• N

  Rolling without slipping on a curved surface

  • Started by NTesla
  • Oct 4, 2025
  • Replies: 81
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
• R

  Is it possible for a vertical rod balancing on a table to lose contact by striking the top of the rod?

  • Started by Rob2024
  • Nov 11, 2025
  • Replies: 7
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
• 

  Coulomb's force vs the Lorentz force

  • Started by Electrodude
  • Nov 1, 2025
  • Replies: 29
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
• 

  Bernoulli vs real life experiment

  • Started by gen x
  • Nov 24, 2025
  • Replies: 16
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help

Recent Insights

• 

  Insights Thinking Outside The Box Versus Knowing What’s In The Box

  • Started by Greg Bernhardt
  • Oct 13, 2025
  • Replies: 26
  • Other Physics Topics
• 

  Insights Why Entangled Photon-Polarization Qubits Violate Bell’s Inequality

  • Started by Greg Bernhardt
  • Sep 29, 2025
  • Replies: 28
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
• 

  Insights Quantum Entanglement is a Kinematic Fact, not a Dynamical Effect

  • Started by Greg Bernhardt
  • Sep 2, 2025
  • Replies: 22
  • Quantum Physics
• 

  Insights What Exactly is Dirac’s Delta Function? - Insight

  • Started by Greg Bernhardt
  • Sep 2, 2025
  • Replies: 33
  • General Math
• 

  Insights Relativator (Circular Slide-Rule): Simulated with Desmos - Insight

  • Started by Greg Bernhardt
  • Sep 2, 2025
  • Replies: 1
  • Special and General Relativity
• P

  Insights Fixing Things Which Can Go Wrong With Complex Numbers

  • Started by PAllen
  • Jul 20, 2025
  • Replies: 7
  • General Math

Back Top