Connecting...

This is a quick preview of the lesson. For full access, please Log In or Sign up.
For more information, please see full course syllabus of AP Physics 1 & 2
For more information, please see full course syllabus of AP Physics 1 & 2
AP Physics 1 & 2 Conservation of Energy
Lecture Description
As stated before, energy, no matter what, is always conserved. This is one of the biggest laws in all of physics, and should be memorized completely. Energy is never created nor destroyed, which means you can always trace back where some form of energy originated. Try thinking of a forklift lifting a box; where did the energy in the forklift come from to do work on the box and where did the energy to make the fuel come from? This topic also gives you another way to think about mechanic problems as up until now we’ve only used our equations for motion to solve problems. With the law of conservation of energy, we can sum up the energy in the system to find a missing piece of the problem and solve it.
Bookmark & Share
Embed
Share this knowledge with your friends!
Copy & Paste this embed code into your website’s HTML
Please ensure that your website editor is in text mode when you paste the code.(In Wordpress, the mode button is on the top right corner.)
×
Since this lesson is not free, only the preview will appear on your website.
- - Allow users to view the embedded video in full-size.
Next Lecture
Previous Lecture
2 answers
Last reply by: Sangeeta Srivastava
Tue Feb 25, 2020 8:05 PM
Post by Sangeeta Srivastava on February 23, 2020
On example 6 why was the height when calculating the potential energy 20 instead of 35?
1 answer
Fri Feb 9, 2018 8:08 AM
Post by Zhouyi Chen on January 20, 2018
Hi professor,
In example 1, you used N/M as the unit for the spring constant. Does spring constant have a unit? Do we need to do that on the AP exam? Thanks!
1 answer
Fri Oct 13, 2017 6:58 AM
Post by Sahitya Senapathy on October 13, 2017
Where did you get that potential energy is equal to kinetic energy plus the work done by friction in example 5? I get why it could be Ug = KE, but why would friction be included
2 answers
Last reply by: Sahitya Senapathy
Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:22 PM
Post by Sahitya Senapathy on October 13, 2017
Why is pendulum's h = L - Lcos instead of just L?
1 answer
Fri Jun 17, 2016 5:40 PM
Post by Hitendrakumar Patel on June 17, 2016
A rodeo rider is riding a bucking bronco when he is thrown off. At the instant he leaves the horse he is located 1.6m above the ground and is moving straight up at 4.0m/s.
A) What maximum height above the ground does the rider reach?
B) At what speed will the rider hit the ground?
2 answers
Last reply by: Hitendrakumar Patel
Fri Jun 17, 2016 6:11 PM
Post by Hitendrakumar Patel on June 17, 2016
A boy fires a pebble with his slingshot. The pebble leaves the slingshot at a speed of 35m/s. How high above the ground will the pebble rise if it is fired straight up?If the pebble is fired so that it goes in a arc(instead of straight), what is the max height, assuming it is moving side ways at 10m/sat the top of the arc? I do not get how to do the second part of the question.
0 answers
Post by Christopher Pieri on May 3, 2015
Gazuntite, brother
2 answers
Last reply by: Micheal Bingham
Sun Jan 4, 2015 11:47 AM
Post by Micheal Bingham on January 3, 2015
In example 6, right when he falls off of the mud slide, how come he only has kinetic energy and not also potential energy since he is elevated above the ground with a height?
1 answer
Last reply by: Daniel Fullerton
Fri Oct 31, 2014 6:31 AM
Post by Foaad Zaid on October 31, 2014
If the base of the cliff is the final point, why isn't it included in the PEg? I understand how it was convenient to break the problem into two different steps, but I just thought that the height for the mgh equation would be 35 meters.
3 answers
Last reply by: Daniel Fullerton
Fri Oct 31, 2014 6:27 AM
Post by Foaad Zaid on October 30, 2014
Hello Professor, In example 2, around 15:41, what happened to the toy's spring final potential energy? I don't see any zeros in the equation that would allow us to cancel it out. Thank you.
1 answer
Thu Oct 30, 2014 6:42 PM
Post by Foaad Zaid on October 30, 2014
For the jet fighter example, would it be possible to use the KEi +PEi = KEf + PEf approach? I don't understand why finding the total kinetic energy first was necessary. Thank you in advance.
1 answer
Fri Aug 29, 2014 6:32 PM
Post by Jungle Jones on August 29, 2014
In example 5, why did you say that gravitational potential energy = kinetic + work done by friction?
Where did the work done by friction get in there?
2 answers
Last reply by: Okwudili Ezeh
Wed Aug 27, 2014 8:56 AM
Post by Okwudili Ezeh on August 26, 2014
Was there any reason why you chose not to cover Mechanical Advantage?
1 answer
Sun Dec 8, 2013 10:05 AM
Post by Emmil Zarrugh on December 7, 2013
When would it be incorrect to find the velocity of something using the kinematics approach, but correct to find the velocity using the energy approach? For example, if an arrow is shot straight upwards from a bow whose string exerts a force on the arrow, one can only find the velocity of the arrow as it leaves the bow using the energy approach and not the kinematics approach because work must be considered, right?