Why do I get negative height?Negative sign of accelerationCan you help me solve a difficult kinematics problem?A ball is dropped from the roof of a building. How fast is it moving after 4.9 seconds? (Absolute value)Height of buildingKinematic Problem, two balls thrown down from building at different times, when will they meet and what distance will they hit at?Calculating initial velocities given trajectory parabolaMotion of tennis ball bouncingConceptually, why is acceleration due to gravity always negative?Does the acceleration due of gravity taken positive or negative matters?How to solve this projectile motion physics problem in a book I'm studying?
How does quantile regression compare to logistic regression with the variable split at the quantile?
What do the dots in this tr command do: tr .............A-Z A-ZA-Z <<< "JVPQBOV" (with 13 dots)
Client team has low performances and low technical skills: we always fix their work and now they stop collaborate with us. How to solve?
Paid for article while in US on F-1 visa?
How is the claim "I am in New York only if I am in America" the same as "If I am in New York, then I am in America?
Replacing matching entries in one column of a file by another column from a different file
Was any UN Security Council vote triple-vetoed?
Languages that we cannot (dis)prove to be Context-Free
Can I ask the recruiters in my resume to put the reason why I am rejected?
Does detail obscure or enhance action?
Can you really stack all of this on an Opportunity Attack?
What typically incentivizes a professor to change jobs to a lower ranking university?
Why do I get two different answers for this counting problem?
Can I make popcorn with any corn?
What does "Puller Prush Person" mean?
Fully-Firstable Anagram Sets
Do I have a twin with permutated remainders?
High voltage LED indicator 40-1000 VDC without additional power supply
Is it legal for company to use my work email to pretend I still work there?
Why is 150k or 200k jobs considered good when there's 300k+ births a month?
What would happen to a modern skyscraper if it rains micro blackholes?
How much of data wrangling is a data scientist's job?
What's that red-plus icon near a text?
What defenses are there against being summoned by the Gate spell?
Why do I get negative height?
Negative sign of accelerationCan you help me solve a difficult kinematics problem?A ball is dropped from the roof of a building. How fast is it moving after 4.9 seconds? (Absolute value)Height of buildingKinematic Problem, two balls thrown down from building at different times, when will they meet and what distance will they hit at?Calculating initial velocities given trajectory parabolaMotion of tennis ball bouncingConceptually, why is acceleration due to gravity always negative?Does the acceleration due of gravity taken positive or negative matters?How to solve this projectile motion physics problem in a book I'm studying?
$begingroup$
A baseball is thrown from the roof $50.1^circ$ above the horizontal. The initial velocity is $11.5 mathrmm/s$.
I'm trying to find how high the ball goes.
I choose positive direction upwards.
$$
H = frac12g v_0y^2
$$
But I get a negative answer since $g$ is negative. Is $g$ an absolute value when working with energy?
homework-and-exercises newtonian-mechanics energy-conservation coordinate-systems projectile
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A baseball is thrown from the roof $50.1^circ$ above the horizontal. The initial velocity is $11.5 mathrmm/s$.
I'm trying to find how high the ball goes.
I choose positive direction upwards.
$$
H = frac12g v_0y^2
$$
But I get a negative answer since $g$ is negative. Is $g$ an absolute value when working with energy?
homework-and-exercises newtonian-mechanics energy-conservation coordinate-systems projectile
New contributor
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
How did you come up with that equation?
$endgroup$
– JMac
Apr 2 at 11:22
$begingroup$
@JMac I got it from: $K_1 + U_1 = K_2 + U_2$.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:25
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A baseball is thrown from the roof $50.1^circ$ above the horizontal. The initial velocity is $11.5 mathrmm/s$.
I'm trying to find how high the ball goes.
I choose positive direction upwards.
$$
H = frac12g v_0y^2
$$
But I get a negative answer since $g$ is negative. Is $g$ an absolute value when working with energy?
homework-and-exercises newtonian-mechanics energy-conservation coordinate-systems projectile
New contributor
$endgroup$
A baseball is thrown from the roof $50.1^circ$ above the horizontal. The initial velocity is $11.5 mathrmm/s$.
I'm trying to find how high the ball goes.
I choose positive direction upwards.
$$
H = frac12g v_0y^2
$$
But I get a negative answer since $g$ is negative. Is $g$ an absolute value when working with energy?
homework-and-exercises newtonian-mechanics energy-conservation coordinate-systems projectile
homework-and-exercises newtonian-mechanics energy-conservation coordinate-systems projectile
New contributor
New contributor
edited Apr 2 at 19:47
Qmechanic♦
107k121991238
107k121991238
New contributor
asked Apr 2 at 11:16
user644361user644361
3014
3014
New contributor
New contributor
3
$begingroup$
How did you come up with that equation?
$endgroup$
– JMac
Apr 2 at 11:22
$begingroup$
@JMac I got it from: $K_1 + U_1 = K_2 + U_2$.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:25
add a comment |
3
$begingroup$
How did you come up with that equation?
$endgroup$
– JMac
Apr 2 at 11:22
$begingroup$
@JMac I got it from: $K_1 + U_1 = K_2 + U_2$.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:25
3
3
$begingroup$
How did you come up with that equation?
$endgroup$
– JMac
Apr 2 at 11:22
$begingroup$
How did you come up with that equation?
$endgroup$
– JMac
Apr 2 at 11:22
$begingroup$
@JMac I got it from: $K_1 + U_1 = K_2 + U_2$.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:25
$begingroup$
@JMac I got it from: $K_1 + U_1 = K_2 + U_2$.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:25
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
$g$ is always positive. The negative sign you might usually see comes from defining down as negative, but the value of $g$ is always positive. This is why you don't ever see absolute value signs and why your equation is actually correct.
To add more detail, the value of $g$ is just the magnitude of acceleration due to gravity near Earth's surface. It is given by $$g=fracGMR^2$$
where $M$ and $R$ are the mass and radius of the earth respectively, and $G$ is a constant. All of these values are positive, so $g$ is also positive.
$endgroup$
9
$begingroup$
While I agree with this answer, I would like to point out that this is a result of convention (in particular the convention to define $g$ as above) and not a fundamental mathematical truth. If you were to define $g$ differently, you'd get a different answer. Of course this is always true, but it's important to point out here because there is a alternate definition of $g$ that makes enough sense to cause this question to be asked.
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 18:09
2
$begingroup$
@DreamConspiracy I suppose this is true, if you no longer want to define $g$ to be the magnitude of the acceleration.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
Apr 2 at 19:29
$begingroup$
yes. The only reason I even mention this is because I have seen people do it this way (and in some cases it very well might be convenient), and that this is not necessarily wrong
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 19:32
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$g$ should always be positive. It is the magnitude of the gravitational field strength. If you choose vertical up as positive $y$, then the gravitational field (a vector) will be $-ghatj$. The gravitational potential energy change within a small vertical range will be
$$Delta U_g=mgDelta y$$
where $g$ is reasonably constant within the $Delta y$ range. For example if a 2 kg object is moved near the surface of the earth from $y_a= 2$ m to $y_b= 3$ m,
$$Delta U_g=mg(y_b-y_a)=19.6~mathrmJ.$$
If it is moved from $y_b$ to $y_a$
$$Delta U_g=mg(y_a-y_b)=-19.6~mathrmJ.$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The first issue is that it's thrown at an angle.
As the question seems to assumes no air friction, the part of the velocity we care about for the answer is its vertical component (11.5 x sin 50.1 = 8.82 m/s). The horizontal component says how far it will travel horizontally, which we aren't being asked about.
So the question is the same as asking about a ball thrown vertically upward at 8.82 m/s.
Next, we have to make a choice which direction we call "positive". That is a completely free choice.
- If we call "up" the + direction , then the ball starts with positive velocity +8.82 (because its initial velocity is in the direction we defined as +), and has an acceleration in the negative direction, with acceleration -9.8 (because gravity acts in the downward direction we defined as -).
- If we call "down" the + direction , then the ball starts with negative velocity -8.82 (because its initial velocity is in the direction we defined as -), and has an acceleration in the positive direction, with acceleration +9.8 (because gravity acts in the upward direction we defined as +).
We can choose either of these, and the answer will be the same.
If we define "up" as the positive direction, which is probably the usual way most people would do it, then the ball starts with a positive velocity, and experiences a constant acceleration (deceleration) in the negative direction. (See how we use positive and negative directions and +/-g?). The ball reaches its highest point when its velocity reaches zero, because after that it starts to move downward again in a negative direction. We want to know how far its travelled in that time.
We can solve this using equations of motion, or energy - the answer will be the same. I'll show both methods.
Using equations of motion
There are different ways to write the equation when we know start velocity (v1 which is 8.82), end velocity (v2 which is zero), and acceleration (a which is -9.8), and want to know distance (s). One easy way is to work out the time (t) it takes:
v2 = v1 + at
=> 0 = 8.82 + (-9.8) t
=> t = 8.82 / 9.8 = 0.9 seconds
How far did it travel?
s = (v1 + v2) t / 2
s = (8.82 + 0) x 0.9 / 2
s = 8.82 x 0.9 /2 = 3.969
The ball travelled 3.969 metres upwards at its highest point.
Using energy
Initial K.E. is m.v12/2 = m.8.822/2 = 38.89 m
Final K.E. = 0 (when the ball is at its highest point, all the K.E. has been transformed into P.E., and it has no vertical velocity.)
The gain in P.E. by raising a ball of weight 'm' by height 'h' is mgh.
But we don't have to consider directions of motion really. We only have to consider energy. It starts with some KE and ends with none. It starts with some PE and ends with a higher gravitational PE because its position is higher within a gravitational field (however it got there)
=> mgh = 38.89m
=> g.h = 38.89
=> 9.8.h = 38.89
=> h = 38.89 / 9.8 = 3.969
Same answer - the ball rises by 3.969 metres at its highest point.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I assume you got to this equation by setting the potential energy at the highest point $E_textpot=mgH$ equal to the vertical kinetic energy $E_textkin=fracmv_y^22$. In the formula for the potential energy, $g$ is to be taken positive, as otherwise this would yield a negative potential energy (which is possible, but not correct in this context).
If you want to see that consistent, derive the formula for the potential energy yourself. In that case $F_textgrav=mg$ since you take $g$ to be negative, and we are only considering the $z$ component. Then, since for lifting something up we need to apply a force opposite the gravitational force, we have
$$E_textpot = int_0^h -F_textgrav ds = int_0^h -mg,ds = left. -mgsright|_s=0^h = -mgh$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I just don't get it how you can willy-nilly change the direction of something in physics when you've defined a positive direction.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:26
$begingroup$
The formula doesn't have absolute value signs for g either, $|g|$
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:29
$begingroup$
@user644361 Which has higher potential energy, the ball at h=1m or the ball at h=10m?
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Apr 2 at 11:32
5
$begingroup$
You don't change it willy-nilly. This is why you should know where formulas come from. If you look at the derivation of the $mgh$ formula, you see that $g$ is taken to be positive, as is usually convention.
$endgroup$
– noah
Apr 2 at 11:44
2
$begingroup$
The work done by a change in potential energy is $W = -Delta U$. Note the minus sign in that equation. You have another minus sign because weight acts in the negative $y$ direction, in your sign convention. You can't do mechanics by just picking equations at random from a textbook and hoping everything will work out right - you have to understand what you are doing.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Apr 2 at 11:58
|
show 7 more comments
$begingroup$
The signs work out correctly as long as you are careful.
If an object accelerates at a constant acceleration $a$ over a distance $s$ then the work done on the object is force times distance. But we have $F=ma$, so the work done on the object is $mas$. So if $K_1$ and $K_2$ are the kinetic energy of the object at the start and at the end of the period, then
$K_2-K_1=mas$
In the case of ballistic motion in a vertical direction, $K_1=frac 1 2 mv^2$ where $v$ is the initial velocity of the object. If the object reaches a maximum height of $h$ then $K_2=0$ when $s=h$, so we have
$-frac1 2 mv^2 = mah$
Substituting $a=-g$ and we have
$-frac1 2 mv^2 = -mgh \ Rightarrow h = frac v^2 2g $
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
user644361 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f470068%2fwhy-do-i-get-negative-height%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
$g$ is always positive. The negative sign you might usually see comes from defining down as negative, but the value of $g$ is always positive. This is why you don't ever see absolute value signs and why your equation is actually correct.
To add more detail, the value of $g$ is just the magnitude of acceleration due to gravity near Earth's surface. It is given by $$g=fracGMR^2$$
where $M$ and $R$ are the mass and radius of the earth respectively, and $G$ is a constant. All of these values are positive, so $g$ is also positive.
$endgroup$
9
$begingroup$
While I agree with this answer, I would like to point out that this is a result of convention (in particular the convention to define $g$ as above) and not a fundamental mathematical truth. If you were to define $g$ differently, you'd get a different answer. Of course this is always true, but it's important to point out here because there is a alternate definition of $g$ that makes enough sense to cause this question to be asked.
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 18:09
2
$begingroup$
@DreamConspiracy I suppose this is true, if you no longer want to define $g$ to be the magnitude of the acceleration.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
Apr 2 at 19:29
$begingroup$
yes. The only reason I even mention this is because I have seen people do it this way (and in some cases it very well might be convenient), and that this is not necessarily wrong
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 19:32
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$g$ is always positive. The negative sign you might usually see comes from defining down as negative, but the value of $g$ is always positive. This is why you don't ever see absolute value signs and why your equation is actually correct.
To add more detail, the value of $g$ is just the magnitude of acceleration due to gravity near Earth's surface. It is given by $$g=fracGMR^2$$
where $M$ and $R$ are the mass and radius of the earth respectively, and $G$ is a constant. All of these values are positive, so $g$ is also positive.
$endgroup$
9
$begingroup$
While I agree with this answer, I would like to point out that this is a result of convention (in particular the convention to define $g$ as above) and not a fundamental mathematical truth. If you were to define $g$ differently, you'd get a different answer. Of course this is always true, but it's important to point out here because there is a alternate definition of $g$ that makes enough sense to cause this question to be asked.
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 18:09
2
$begingroup$
@DreamConspiracy I suppose this is true, if you no longer want to define $g$ to be the magnitude of the acceleration.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
Apr 2 at 19:29
$begingroup$
yes. The only reason I even mention this is because I have seen people do it this way (and in some cases it very well might be convenient), and that this is not necessarily wrong
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 19:32
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$g$ is always positive. The negative sign you might usually see comes from defining down as negative, but the value of $g$ is always positive. This is why you don't ever see absolute value signs and why your equation is actually correct.
To add more detail, the value of $g$ is just the magnitude of acceleration due to gravity near Earth's surface. It is given by $$g=fracGMR^2$$
where $M$ and $R$ are the mass and radius of the earth respectively, and $G$ is a constant. All of these values are positive, so $g$ is also positive.
$endgroup$
$g$ is always positive. The negative sign you might usually see comes from defining down as negative, but the value of $g$ is always positive. This is why you don't ever see absolute value signs and why your equation is actually correct.
To add more detail, the value of $g$ is just the magnitude of acceleration due to gravity near Earth's surface. It is given by $$g=fracGMR^2$$
where $M$ and $R$ are the mass and radius of the earth respectively, and $G$ is a constant. All of these values are positive, so $g$ is also positive.
answered Apr 2 at 11:51
Aaron StevensAaron Stevens
14.5k42453
14.5k42453
9
$begingroup$
While I agree with this answer, I would like to point out that this is a result of convention (in particular the convention to define $g$ as above) and not a fundamental mathematical truth. If you were to define $g$ differently, you'd get a different answer. Of course this is always true, but it's important to point out here because there is a alternate definition of $g$ that makes enough sense to cause this question to be asked.
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 18:09
2
$begingroup$
@DreamConspiracy I suppose this is true, if you no longer want to define $g$ to be the magnitude of the acceleration.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
Apr 2 at 19:29
$begingroup$
yes. The only reason I even mention this is because I have seen people do it this way (and in some cases it very well might be convenient), and that this is not necessarily wrong
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 19:32
add a comment |
9
$begingroup$
While I agree with this answer, I would like to point out that this is a result of convention (in particular the convention to define $g$ as above) and not a fundamental mathematical truth. If you were to define $g$ differently, you'd get a different answer. Of course this is always true, but it's important to point out here because there is a alternate definition of $g$ that makes enough sense to cause this question to be asked.
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 18:09
2
$begingroup$
@DreamConspiracy I suppose this is true, if you no longer want to define $g$ to be the magnitude of the acceleration.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
Apr 2 at 19:29
$begingroup$
yes. The only reason I even mention this is because I have seen people do it this way (and in some cases it very well might be convenient), and that this is not necessarily wrong
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 19:32
9
9
$begingroup$
While I agree with this answer, I would like to point out that this is a result of convention (in particular the convention to define $g$ as above) and not a fundamental mathematical truth. If you were to define $g$ differently, you'd get a different answer. Of course this is always true, but it's important to point out here because there is a alternate definition of $g$ that makes enough sense to cause this question to be asked.
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 18:09
$begingroup$
While I agree with this answer, I would like to point out that this is a result of convention (in particular the convention to define $g$ as above) and not a fundamental mathematical truth. If you were to define $g$ differently, you'd get a different answer. Of course this is always true, but it's important to point out here because there is a alternate definition of $g$ that makes enough sense to cause this question to be asked.
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 18:09
2
2
$begingroup$
@DreamConspiracy I suppose this is true, if you no longer want to define $g$ to be the magnitude of the acceleration.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
Apr 2 at 19:29
$begingroup$
@DreamConspiracy I suppose this is true, if you no longer want to define $g$ to be the magnitude of the acceleration.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
Apr 2 at 19:29
$begingroup$
yes. The only reason I even mention this is because I have seen people do it this way (and in some cases it very well might be convenient), and that this is not necessarily wrong
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 19:32
$begingroup$
yes. The only reason I even mention this is because I have seen people do it this way (and in some cases it very well might be convenient), and that this is not necessarily wrong
$endgroup$
– DreamConspiracy
Apr 2 at 19:32
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$g$ should always be positive. It is the magnitude of the gravitational field strength. If you choose vertical up as positive $y$, then the gravitational field (a vector) will be $-ghatj$. The gravitational potential energy change within a small vertical range will be
$$Delta U_g=mgDelta y$$
where $g$ is reasonably constant within the $Delta y$ range. For example if a 2 kg object is moved near the surface of the earth from $y_a= 2$ m to $y_b= 3$ m,
$$Delta U_g=mg(y_b-y_a)=19.6~mathrmJ.$$
If it is moved from $y_b$ to $y_a$
$$Delta U_g=mg(y_a-y_b)=-19.6~mathrmJ.$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$g$ should always be positive. It is the magnitude of the gravitational field strength. If you choose vertical up as positive $y$, then the gravitational field (a vector) will be $-ghatj$. The gravitational potential energy change within a small vertical range will be
$$Delta U_g=mgDelta y$$
where $g$ is reasonably constant within the $Delta y$ range. For example if a 2 kg object is moved near the surface of the earth from $y_a= 2$ m to $y_b= 3$ m,
$$Delta U_g=mg(y_b-y_a)=19.6~mathrmJ.$$
If it is moved from $y_b$ to $y_a$
$$Delta U_g=mg(y_a-y_b)=-19.6~mathrmJ.$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$g$ should always be positive. It is the magnitude of the gravitational field strength. If you choose vertical up as positive $y$, then the gravitational field (a vector) will be $-ghatj$. The gravitational potential energy change within a small vertical range will be
$$Delta U_g=mgDelta y$$
where $g$ is reasonably constant within the $Delta y$ range. For example if a 2 kg object is moved near the surface of the earth from $y_a= 2$ m to $y_b= 3$ m,
$$Delta U_g=mg(y_b-y_a)=19.6~mathrmJ.$$
If it is moved from $y_b$ to $y_a$
$$Delta U_g=mg(y_a-y_b)=-19.6~mathrmJ.$$
$endgroup$
$g$ should always be positive. It is the magnitude of the gravitational field strength. If you choose vertical up as positive $y$, then the gravitational field (a vector) will be $-ghatj$. The gravitational potential energy change within a small vertical range will be
$$Delta U_g=mgDelta y$$
where $g$ is reasonably constant within the $Delta y$ range. For example if a 2 kg object is moved near the surface of the earth from $y_a= 2$ m to $y_b= 3$ m,
$$Delta U_g=mg(y_b-y_a)=19.6~mathrmJ.$$
If it is moved from $y_b$ to $y_a$
$$Delta U_g=mg(y_a-y_b)=-19.6~mathrmJ.$$
answered Apr 2 at 12:04
Bill NBill N
9,87912241
9,87912241
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The first issue is that it's thrown at an angle.
As the question seems to assumes no air friction, the part of the velocity we care about for the answer is its vertical component (11.5 x sin 50.1 = 8.82 m/s). The horizontal component says how far it will travel horizontally, which we aren't being asked about.
So the question is the same as asking about a ball thrown vertically upward at 8.82 m/s.
Next, we have to make a choice which direction we call "positive". That is a completely free choice.
- If we call "up" the + direction , then the ball starts with positive velocity +8.82 (because its initial velocity is in the direction we defined as +), and has an acceleration in the negative direction, with acceleration -9.8 (because gravity acts in the downward direction we defined as -).
- If we call "down" the + direction , then the ball starts with negative velocity -8.82 (because its initial velocity is in the direction we defined as -), and has an acceleration in the positive direction, with acceleration +9.8 (because gravity acts in the upward direction we defined as +).
We can choose either of these, and the answer will be the same.
If we define "up" as the positive direction, which is probably the usual way most people would do it, then the ball starts with a positive velocity, and experiences a constant acceleration (deceleration) in the negative direction. (See how we use positive and negative directions and +/-g?). The ball reaches its highest point when its velocity reaches zero, because after that it starts to move downward again in a negative direction. We want to know how far its travelled in that time.
We can solve this using equations of motion, or energy - the answer will be the same. I'll show both methods.
Using equations of motion
There are different ways to write the equation when we know start velocity (v1 which is 8.82), end velocity (v2 which is zero), and acceleration (a which is -9.8), and want to know distance (s). One easy way is to work out the time (t) it takes:
v2 = v1 + at
=> 0 = 8.82 + (-9.8) t
=> t = 8.82 / 9.8 = 0.9 seconds
How far did it travel?
s = (v1 + v2) t / 2
s = (8.82 + 0) x 0.9 / 2
s = 8.82 x 0.9 /2 = 3.969
The ball travelled 3.969 metres upwards at its highest point.
Using energy
Initial K.E. is m.v12/2 = m.8.822/2 = 38.89 m
Final K.E. = 0 (when the ball is at its highest point, all the K.E. has been transformed into P.E., and it has no vertical velocity.)
The gain in P.E. by raising a ball of weight 'm' by height 'h' is mgh.
But we don't have to consider directions of motion really. We only have to consider energy. It starts with some KE and ends with none. It starts with some PE and ends with a higher gravitational PE because its position is higher within a gravitational field (however it got there)
=> mgh = 38.89m
=> g.h = 38.89
=> 9.8.h = 38.89
=> h = 38.89 / 9.8 = 3.969
Same answer - the ball rises by 3.969 metres at its highest point.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The first issue is that it's thrown at an angle.
As the question seems to assumes no air friction, the part of the velocity we care about for the answer is its vertical component (11.5 x sin 50.1 = 8.82 m/s). The horizontal component says how far it will travel horizontally, which we aren't being asked about.
So the question is the same as asking about a ball thrown vertically upward at 8.82 m/s.
Next, we have to make a choice which direction we call "positive". That is a completely free choice.
- If we call "up" the + direction , then the ball starts with positive velocity +8.82 (because its initial velocity is in the direction we defined as +), and has an acceleration in the negative direction, with acceleration -9.8 (because gravity acts in the downward direction we defined as -).
- If we call "down" the + direction , then the ball starts with negative velocity -8.82 (because its initial velocity is in the direction we defined as -), and has an acceleration in the positive direction, with acceleration +9.8 (because gravity acts in the upward direction we defined as +).
We can choose either of these, and the answer will be the same.
If we define "up" as the positive direction, which is probably the usual way most people would do it, then the ball starts with a positive velocity, and experiences a constant acceleration (deceleration) in the negative direction. (See how we use positive and negative directions and +/-g?). The ball reaches its highest point when its velocity reaches zero, because after that it starts to move downward again in a negative direction. We want to know how far its travelled in that time.
We can solve this using equations of motion, or energy - the answer will be the same. I'll show both methods.
Using equations of motion
There are different ways to write the equation when we know start velocity (v1 which is 8.82), end velocity (v2 which is zero), and acceleration (a which is -9.8), and want to know distance (s). One easy way is to work out the time (t) it takes:
v2 = v1 + at
=> 0 = 8.82 + (-9.8) t
=> t = 8.82 / 9.8 = 0.9 seconds
How far did it travel?
s = (v1 + v2) t / 2
s = (8.82 + 0) x 0.9 / 2
s = 8.82 x 0.9 /2 = 3.969
The ball travelled 3.969 metres upwards at its highest point.
Using energy
Initial K.E. is m.v12/2 = m.8.822/2 = 38.89 m
Final K.E. = 0 (when the ball is at its highest point, all the K.E. has been transformed into P.E., and it has no vertical velocity.)
The gain in P.E. by raising a ball of weight 'm' by height 'h' is mgh.
But we don't have to consider directions of motion really. We only have to consider energy. It starts with some KE and ends with none. It starts with some PE and ends with a higher gravitational PE because its position is higher within a gravitational field (however it got there)
=> mgh = 38.89m
=> g.h = 38.89
=> 9.8.h = 38.89
=> h = 38.89 / 9.8 = 3.969
Same answer - the ball rises by 3.969 metres at its highest point.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The first issue is that it's thrown at an angle.
As the question seems to assumes no air friction, the part of the velocity we care about for the answer is its vertical component (11.5 x sin 50.1 = 8.82 m/s). The horizontal component says how far it will travel horizontally, which we aren't being asked about.
So the question is the same as asking about a ball thrown vertically upward at 8.82 m/s.
Next, we have to make a choice which direction we call "positive". That is a completely free choice.
- If we call "up" the + direction , then the ball starts with positive velocity +8.82 (because its initial velocity is in the direction we defined as +), and has an acceleration in the negative direction, with acceleration -9.8 (because gravity acts in the downward direction we defined as -).
- If we call "down" the + direction , then the ball starts with negative velocity -8.82 (because its initial velocity is in the direction we defined as -), and has an acceleration in the positive direction, with acceleration +9.8 (because gravity acts in the upward direction we defined as +).
We can choose either of these, and the answer will be the same.
If we define "up" as the positive direction, which is probably the usual way most people would do it, then the ball starts with a positive velocity, and experiences a constant acceleration (deceleration) in the negative direction. (See how we use positive and negative directions and +/-g?). The ball reaches its highest point when its velocity reaches zero, because after that it starts to move downward again in a negative direction. We want to know how far its travelled in that time.
We can solve this using equations of motion, or energy - the answer will be the same. I'll show both methods.
Using equations of motion
There are different ways to write the equation when we know start velocity (v1 which is 8.82), end velocity (v2 which is zero), and acceleration (a which is -9.8), and want to know distance (s). One easy way is to work out the time (t) it takes:
v2 = v1 + at
=> 0 = 8.82 + (-9.8) t
=> t = 8.82 / 9.8 = 0.9 seconds
How far did it travel?
s = (v1 + v2) t / 2
s = (8.82 + 0) x 0.9 / 2
s = 8.82 x 0.9 /2 = 3.969
The ball travelled 3.969 metres upwards at its highest point.
Using energy
Initial K.E. is m.v12/2 = m.8.822/2 = 38.89 m
Final K.E. = 0 (when the ball is at its highest point, all the K.E. has been transformed into P.E., and it has no vertical velocity.)
The gain in P.E. by raising a ball of weight 'm' by height 'h' is mgh.
But we don't have to consider directions of motion really. We only have to consider energy. It starts with some KE and ends with none. It starts with some PE and ends with a higher gravitational PE because its position is higher within a gravitational field (however it got there)
=> mgh = 38.89m
=> g.h = 38.89
=> 9.8.h = 38.89
=> h = 38.89 / 9.8 = 3.969
Same answer - the ball rises by 3.969 metres at its highest point.
$endgroup$
The first issue is that it's thrown at an angle.
As the question seems to assumes no air friction, the part of the velocity we care about for the answer is its vertical component (11.5 x sin 50.1 = 8.82 m/s). The horizontal component says how far it will travel horizontally, which we aren't being asked about.
So the question is the same as asking about a ball thrown vertically upward at 8.82 m/s.
Next, we have to make a choice which direction we call "positive". That is a completely free choice.
- If we call "up" the + direction , then the ball starts with positive velocity +8.82 (because its initial velocity is in the direction we defined as +), and has an acceleration in the negative direction, with acceleration -9.8 (because gravity acts in the downward direction we defined as -).
- If we call "down" the + direction , then the ball starts with negative velocity -8.82 (because its initial velocity is in the direction we defined as -), and has an acceleration in the positive direction, with acceleration +9.8 (because gravity acts in the upward direction we defined as +).
We can choose either of these, and the answer will be the same.
If we define "up" as the positive direction, which is probably the usual way most people would do it, then the ball starts with a positive velocity, and experiences a constant acceleration (deceleration) in the negative direction. (See how we use positive and negative directions and +/-g?). The ball reaches its highest point when its velocity reaches zero, because after that it starts to move downward again in a negative direction. We want to know how far its travelled in that time.
We can solve this using equations of motion, or energy - the answer will be the same. I'll show both methods.
Using equations of motion
There are different ways to write the equation when we know start velocity (v1 which is 8.82), end velocity (v2 which is zero), and acceleration (a which is -9.8), and want to know distance (s). One easy way is to work out the time (t) it takes:
v2 = v1 + at
=> 0 = 8.82 + (-9.8) t
=> t = 8.82 / 9.8 = 0.9 seconds
How far did it travel?
s = (v1 + v2) t / 2
s = (8.82 + 0) x 0.9 / 2
s = 8.82 x 0.9 /2 = 3.969
The ball travelled 3.969 metres upwards at its highest point.
Using energy
Initial K.E. is m.v12/2 = m.8.822/2 = 38.89 m
Final K.E. = 0 (when the ball is at its highest point, all the K.E. has been transformed into P.E., and it has no vertical velocity.)
The gain in P.E. by raising a ball of weight 'm' by height 'h' is mgh.
But we don't have to consider directions of motion really. We only have to consider energy. It starts with some KE and ends with none. It starts with some PE and ends with a higher gravitational PE because its position is higher within a gravitational field (however it got there)
=> mgh = 38.89m
=> g.h = 38.89
=> 9.8.h = 38.89
=> h = 38.89 / 9.8 = 3.969
Same answer - the ball rises by 3.969 metres at its highest point.
edited Apr 2 at 20:45
answered Apr 2 at 19:41
StilezStilez
1,468413
1,468413
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I assume you got to this equation by setting the potential energy at the highest point $E_textpot=mgH$ equal to the vertical kinetic energy $E_textkin=fracmv_y^22$. In the formula for the potential energy, $g$ is to be taken positive, as otherwise this would yield a negative potential energy (which is possible, but not correct in this context).
If you want to see that consistent, derive the formula for the potential energy yourself. In that case $F_textgrav=mg$ since you take $g$ to be negative, and we are only considering the $z$ component. Then, since for lifting something up we need to apply a force opposite the gravitational force, we have
$$E_textpot = int_0^h -F_textgrav ds = int_0^h -mg,ds = left. -mgsright|_s=0^h = -mgh$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I just don't get it how you can willy-nilly change the direction of something in physics when you've defined a positive direction.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:26
$begingroup$
The formula doesn't have absolute value signs for g either, $|g|$
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:29
$begingroup$
@user644361 Which has higher potential energy, the ball at h=1m or the ball at h=10m?
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Apr 2 at 11:32
5
$begingroup$
You don't change it willy-nilly. This is why you should know where formulas come from. If you look at the derivation of the $mgh$ formula, you see that $g$ is taken to be positive, as is usually convention.
$endgroup$
– noah
Apr 2 at 11:44
2
$begingroup$
The work done by a change in potential energy is $W = -Delta U$. Note the minus sign in that equation. You have another minus sign because weight acts in the negative $y$ direction, in your sign convention. You can't do mechanics by just picking equations at random from a textbook and hoping everything will work out right - you have to understand what you are doing.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Apr 2 at 11:58
|
show 7 more comments
$begingroup$
I assume you got to this equation by setting the potential energy at the highest point $E_textpot=mgH$ equal to the vertical kinetic energy $E_textkin=fracmv_y^22$. In the formula for the potential energy, $g$ is to be taken positive, as otherwise this would yield a negative potential energy (which is possible, but not correct in this context).
If you want to see that consistent, derive the formula for the potential energy yourself. In that case $F_textgrav=mg$ since you take $g$ to be negative, and we are only considering the $z$ component. Then, since for lifting something up we need to apply a force opposite the gravitational force, we have
$$E_textpot = int_0^h -F_textgrav ds = int_0^h -mg,ds = left. -mgsright|_s=0^h = -mgh$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I just don't get it how you can willy-nilly change the direction of something in physics when you've defined a positive direction.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:26
$begingroup$
The formula doesn't have absolute value signs for g either, $|g|$
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:29
$begingroup$
@user644361 Which has higher potential energy, the ball at h=1m or the ball at h=10m?
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Apr 2 at 11:32
5
$begingroup$
You don't change it willy-nilly. This is why you should know where formulas come from. If you look at the derivation of the $mgh$ formula, you see that $g$ is taken to be positive, as is usually convention.
$endgroup$
– noah
Apr 2 at 11:44
2
$begingroup$
The work done by a change in potential energy is $W = -Delta U$. Note the minus sign in that equation. You have another minus sign because weight acts in the negative $y$ direction, in your sign convention. You can't do mechanics by just picking equations at random from a textbook and hoping everything will work out right - you have to understand what you are doing.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Apr 2 at 11:58
|
show 7 more comments
$begingroup$
I assume you got to this equation by setting the potential energy at the highest point $E_textpot=mgH$ equal to the vertical kinetic energy $E_textkin=fracmv_y^22$. In the formula for the potential energy, $g$ is to be taken positive, as otherwise this would yield a negative potential energy (which is possible, but not correct in this context).
If you want to see that consistent, derive the formula for the potential energy yourself. In that case $F_textgrav=mg$ since you take $g$ to be negative, and we are only considering the $z$ component. Then, since for lifting something up we need to apply a force opposite the gravitational force, we have
$$E_textpot = int_0^h -F_textgrav ds = int_0^h -mg,ds = left. -mgsright|_s=0^h = -mgh$$
$endgroup$
I assume you got to this equation by setting the potential energy at the highest point $E_textpot=mgH$ equal to the vertical kinetic energy $E_textkin=fracmv_y^22$. In the formula for the potential energy, $g$ is to be taken positive, as otherwise this would yield a negative potential energy (which is possible, but not correct in this context).
If you want to see that consistent, derive the formula for the potential energy yourself. In that case $F_textgrav=mg$ since you take $g$ to be negative, and we are only considering the $z$ component. Then, since for lifting something up we need to apply a force opposite the gravitational force, we have
$$E_textpot = int_0^h -F_textgrav ds = int_0^h -mg,ds = left. -mgsright|_s=0^h = -mgh$$
edited Apr 2 at 11:58
answered Apr 2 at 11:22
noahnoah
4,13311226
4,13311226
$begingroup$
I just don't get it how you can willy-nilly change the direction of something in physics when you've defined a positive direction.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:26
$begingroup$
The formula doesn't have absolute value signs for g either, $|g|$
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:29
$begingroup$
@user644361 Which has higher potential energy, the ball at h=1m or the ball at h=10m?
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Apr 2 at 11:32
5
$begingroup$
You don't change it willy-nilly. This is why you should know where formulas come from. If you look at the derivation of the $mgh$ formula, you see that $g$ is taken to be positive, as is usually convention.
$endgroup$
– noah
Apr 2 at 11:44
2
$begingroup$
The work done by a change in potential energy is $W = -Delta U$. Note the minus sign in that equation. You have another minus sign because weight acts in the negative $y$ direction, in your sign convention. You can't do mechanics by just picking equations at random from a textbook and hoping everything will work out right - you have to understand what you are doing.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Apr 2 at 11:58
|
show 7 more comments
$begingroup$
I just don't get it how you can willy-nilly change the direction of something in physics when you've defined a positive direction.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:26
$begingroup$
The formula doesn't have absolute value signs for g either, $|g|$
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:29
$begingroup$
@user644361 Which has higher potential energy, the ball at h=1m or the ball at h=10m?
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Apr 2 at 11:32
5
$begingroup$
You don't change it willy-nilly. This is why you should know where formulas come from. If you look at the derivation of the $mgh$ formula, you see that $g$ is taken to be positive, as is usually convention.
$endgroup$
– noah
Apr 2 at 11:44
2
$begingroup$
The work done by a change in potential energy is $W = -Delta U$. Note the minus sign in that equation. You have another minus sign because weight acts in the negative $y$ direction, in your sign convention. You can't do mechanics by just picking equations at random from a textbook and hoping everything will work out right - you have to understand what you are doing.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Apr 2 at 11:58
$begingroup$
I just don't get it how you can willy-nilly change the direction of something in physics when you've defined a positive direction.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:26
$begingroup$
I just don't get it how you can willy-nilly change the direction of something in physics when you've defined a positive direction.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:26
$begingroup$
The formula doesn't have absolute value signs for g either, $|g|$
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:29
$begingroup$
The formula doesn't have absolute value signs for g either, $|g|$
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:29
$begingroup$
@user644361 Which has higher potential energy, the ball at h=1m or the ball at h=10m?
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Apr 2 at 11:32
$begingroup$
@user644361 Which has higher potential energy, the ball at h=1m or the ball at h=10m?
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
Apr 2 at 11:32
5
5
$begingroup$
You don't change it willy-nilly. This is why you should know where formulas come from. If you look at the derivation of the $mgh$ formula, you see that $g$ is taken to be positive, as is usually convention.
$endgroup$
– noah
Apr 2 at 11:44
$begingroup$
You don't change it willy-nilly. This is why you should know where formulas come from. If you look at the derivation of the $mgh$ formula, you see that $g$ is taken to be positive, as is usually convention.
$endgroup$
– noah
Apr 2 at 11:44
2
2
$begingroup$
The work done by a change in potential energy is $W = -Delta U$. Note the minus sign in that equation. You have another minus sign because weight acts in the negative $y$ direction, in your sign convention. You can't do mechanics by just picking equations at random from a textbook and hoping everything will work out right - you have to understand what you are doing.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Apr 2 at 11:58
$begingroup$
The work done by a change in potential energy is $W = -Delta U$. Note the minus sign in that equation. You have another minus sign because weight acts in the negative $y$ direction, in your sign convention. You can't do mechanics by just picking equations at random from a textbook and hoping everything will work out right - you have to understand what you are doing.
$endgroup$
– alephzero
Apr 2 at 11:58
|
show 7 more comments
$begingroup$
The signs work out correctly as long as you are careful.
If an object accelerates at a constant acceleration $a$ over a distance $s$ then the work done on the object is force times distance. But we have $F=ma$, so the work done on the object is $mas$. So if $K_1$ and $K_2$ are the kinetic energy of the object at the start and at the end of the period, then
$K_2-K_1=mas$
In the case of ballistic motion in a vertical direction, $K_1=frac 1 2 mv^2$ where $v$ is the initial velocity of the object. If the object reaches a maximum height of $h$ then $K_2=0$ when $s=h$, so we have
$-frac1 2 mv^2 = mah$
Substituting $a=-g$ and we have
$-frac1 2 mv^2 = -mgh \ Rightarrow h = frac v^2 2g $
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The signs work out correctly as long as you are careful.
If an object accelerates at a constant acceleration $a$ over a distance $s$ then the work done on the object is force times distance. But we have $F=ma$, so the work done on the object is $mas$. So if $K_1$ and $K_2$ are the kinetic energy of the object at the start and at the end of the period, then
$K_2-K_1=mas$
In the case of ballistic motion in a vertical direction, $K_1=frac 1 2 mv^2$ where $v$ is the initial velocity of the object. If the object reaches a maximum height of $h$ then $K_2=0$ when $s=h$, so we have
$-frac1 2 mv^2 = mah$
Substituting $a=-g$ and we have
$-frac1 2 mv^2 = -mgh \ Rightarrow h = frac v^2 2g $
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The signs work out correctly as long as you are careful.
If an object accelerates at a constant acceleration $a$ over a distance $s$ then the work done on the object is force times distance. But we have $F=ma$, so the work done on the object is $mas$. So if $K_1$ and $K_2$ are the kinetic energy of the object at the start and at the end of the period, then
$K_2-K_1=mas$
In the case of ballistic motion in a vertical direction, $K_1=frac 1 2 mv^2$ where $v$ is the initial velocity of the object. If the object reaches a maximum height of $h$ then $K_2=0$ when $s=h$, so we have
$-frac1 2 mv^2 = mah$
Substituting $a=-g$ and we have
$-frac1 2 mv^2 = -mgh \ Rightarrow h = frac v^2 2g $
$endgroup$
The signs work out correctly as long as you are careful.
If an object accelerates at a constant acceleration $a$ over a distance $s$ then the work done on the object is force times distance. But we have $F=ma$, so the work done on the object is $mas$. So if $K_1$ and $K_2$ are the kinetic energy of the object at the start and at the end of the period, then
$K_2-K_1=mas$
In the case of ballistic motion in a vertical direction, $K_1=frac 1 2 mv^2$ where $v$ is the initial velocity of the object. If the object reaches a maximum height of $h$ then $K_2=0$ when $s=h$, so we have
$-frac1 2 mv^2 = mah$
Substituting $a=-g$ and we have
$-frac1 2 mv^2 = -mgh \ Rightarrow h = frac v^2 2g $
answered Apr 2 at 12:13
gandalf61gandalf61
53529
53529
add a comment |
add a comment |
user644361 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user644361 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user644361 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
user644361 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f470068%2fwhy-do-i-get-negative-height%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
$begingroup$
How did you come up with that equation?
$endgroup$
– JMac
Apr 2 at 11:22
$begingroup$
@JMac I got it from: $K_1 + U_1 = K_2 + U_2$.
$endgroup$
– user644361
Apr 2 at 11:25