Why is work done on an object greater at higher speeds?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












From this comment by orlp:




If I strap a rocket booster to a rocket in space and fire it for one second, then the work provided is much higher when the rocket is flying fast compared to when the rocket was stationary. In both cases the rocket fires for the same duration but in the former case the rocket travels a much greater distance during this period. What gives?











share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




Pilchard123 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.



















  • Net work done on an object such as a rocket always equals its change in kinetic energy.
    – David White
    1 hour ago














up vote
2
down vote

favorite












From this comment by orlp:




If I strap a rocket booster to a rocket in space and fire it for one second, then the work provided is much higher when the rocket is flying fast compared to when the rocket was stationary. In both cases the rocket fires for the same duration but in the former case the rocket travels a much greater distance during this period. What gives?











share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




Pilchard123 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.



















  • Net work done on an object such as a rocket always equals its change in kinetic energy.
    – David White
    1 hour ago












up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite











From this comment by orlp:




If I strap a rocket booster to a rocket in space and fire it for one second, then the work provided is much higher when the rocket is flying fast compared to when the rocket was stationary. In both cases the rocket fires for the same duration but in the former case the rocket travels a much greater distance during this period. What gives?











share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




Pilchard123 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











From this comment by orlp:




If I strap a rocket booster to a rocket in space and fire it for one second, then the work provided is much higher when the rocket is flying fast compared to when the rocket was stationary. In both cases the rocket fires for the same duration but in the former case the rocket travels a much greater distance during this period. What gives?








forces work distance






share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




Pilchard123 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question







New contributor




Pilchard123 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question






New contributor




Pilchard123 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 1 hour ago









Pilchard123

1113




1113




New contributor




Pilchard123 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Pilchard123 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Pilchard123 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











  • Net work done on an object such as a rocket always equals its change in kinetic energy.
    – David White
    1 hour ago
















  • Net work done on an object such as a rocket always equals its change in kinetic energy.
    – David White
    1 hour ago















Net work done on an object such as a rocket always equals its change in kinetic energy.
– David White
1 hour ago




Net work done on an object such as a rocket always equals its change in kinetic energy.
– David White
1 hour ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
4
down vote













The key point of this question is that it intuitively seems like conservation of energy is not working right. A rocket is powered by a chemical reaction that releases chemical energy at a constant rate. So how can a constant rate of energy release lead to a greater increase in KE when going fast?



To understand this it is useful to consider a “toy model” rocket that operates on the same principles, but is easier to analyze. Specifically, let’s consider a 10 kg ball (rocket) and a 1 kg ball (exhaust) which is attached to a massless spring (fuel).



Suppose this spring has enough energy stored that when the rocket is initially at rest it can propel it to 1 m/s, and by conservation of momentum the exhaust is propelled to -10 m/s. Conversely, if the rocket starts at 5 m/s then after “burning” the fuel the rocket is propelled to 6 m/s and the exhaust moves at -5 m/s.



So now let’s check energy. In the first case the KE of the rocket increased from 0 J to 5 J, while in the second case it increased from 125 J to 180 J. The spring stores the same amount of energy in both cases, so why does the KE increase by 5 J at the low speed and by 55 J at the high speed?



Notice that we forgot to calculate the energy that went into the exhaust. This is the pivotal mistake of most such analyses. In the first case the KE of the exhaust increased from 0 J to 50 J, while in the second case the KE was 12.5 J before and after. So in both cases the total change in KE (both the rocket and the exhaust) was 55 J.



At low speeds most of the fuel’s energy is “wasted” in the KE of the exhaust. At higher speeds more goes into the rocket and less into the exhaust. For a real rocket, the same thing happens on a continuous basis. Both energy and momentum are conserved, and in fact more power is delivered to the vehicle as the speed increases under constant thrust.






share|cite|improve this answer



























    up vote
    2
    down vote













    There are multiple ways to view this.



    The easiest, I think, is that kinetic energy scales with the square of velocity
    $$K=frac 12 m v^2$$



    If we assume that the rocket booster supplies a constant acceleration, then comparing initial and final velocities we find that
    $$Delta v=v_final-v_init=at$$



    So for the same amount of time, the change in the velocity is the same, regardless of what the starting velocity actually is. Since we have a squared dependence on the velocity in $K$, this means that the kinetic energy increases more if we started out with a larger velocitiy. i.e.
    $$Delta K=frac 12 m v_final^2-frac 12 m v_init^2=frac 12 m (v_final-v_init)(v_final+v_init)=frac 12 m Delta v (Delta v+2v_init)$$



    So as we can see, the sum of the velocities in the expression for $Delta K$ is what contributes to a larger change in kinetic energy. Since the work done is equal to the change in kinetic energy, it must be that the rocket does more work when we start off at a larger velocity.



    The second way to view this, which you could argue is the same as the first, is to look at the definition of work
    $$W=intvec F cdot dvec x$$



    Or in one dimension with a constant force
    $$W=FDelta x$$



    Now, once again assuming a constant acceleration, we know that
    $$Delta x = frac 12 a t^2 + v_initt$$



    So that the work done is
    $$W=Fleft(frac 12 a t^2 + v_inittright)$$



    Once again, we see that the initial velocity determines the work. A qualitative explanation from this is that when the velocity is larger, then the object covers more distance in the same amount of time. So if we look at the time the force is being applied, the faster it is moving the larger distance the force is applied over. Therefore, we get more work done if the object is initially moving faster.



    The supposed issue behind all of this is that is seems like we are getting more energy from applying the same force for the same amount of time. But if you work through it you find that this is no issue at all. This is even true for objects falling near the Earth's surface. Even though the force is constant, gravity does more and more work on the object while it falls. Or in other words, the rate of energy conversion from potential to kinetic energy increases as the object falls.






    share|cite|improve this answer




















      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',
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: false,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );






      Pilchard123 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









       

      draft saved


      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f428952%2fwhy-is-work-done-on-an-object-greater-at-higher-speeds%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest






























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes








      up vote
      4
      down vote













      The key point of this question is that it intuitively seems like conservation of energy is not working right. A rocket is powered by a chemical reaction that releases chemical energy at a constant rate. So how can a constant rate of energy release lead to a greater increase in KE when going fast?



      To understand this it is useful to consider a “toy model” rocket that operates on the same principles, but is easier to analyze. Specifically, let’s consider a 10 kg ball (rocket) and a 1 kg ball (exhaust) which is attached to a massless spring (fuel).



      Suppose this spring has enough energy stored that when the rocket is initially at rest it can propel it to 1 m/s, and by conservation of momentum the exhaust is propelled to -10 m/s. Conversely, if the rocket starts at 5 m/s then after “burning” the fuel the rocket is propelled to 6 m/s and the exhaust moves at -5 m/s.



      So now let’s check energy. In the first case the KE of the rocket increased from 0 J to 5 J, while in the second case it increased from 125 J to 180 J. The spring stores the same amount of energy in both cases, so why does the KE increase by 5 J at the low speed and by 55 J at the high speed?



      Notice that we forgot to calculate the energy that went into the exhaust. This is the pivotal mistake of most such analyses. In the first case the KE of the exhaust increased from 0 J to 50 J, while in the second case the KE was 12.5 J before and after. So in both cases the total change in KE (both the rocket and the exhaust) was 55 J.



      At low speeds most of the fuel’s energy is “wasted” in the KE of the exhaust. At higher speeds more goes into the rocket and less into the exhaust. For a real rocket, the same thing happens on a continuous basis. Both energy and momentum are conserved, and in fact more power is delivered to the vehicle as the speed increases under constant thrust.






      share|cite|improve this answer
























        up vote
        4
        down vote













        The key point of this question is that it intuitively seems like conservation of energy is not working right. A rocket is powered by a chemical reaction that releases chemical energy at a constant rate. So how can a constant rate of energy release lead to a greater increase in KE when going fast?



        To understand this it is useful to consider a “toy model” rocket that operates on the same principles, but is easier to analyze. Specifically, let’s consider a 10 kg ball (rocket) and a 1 kg ball (exhaust) which is attached to a massless spring (fuel).



        Suppose this spring has enough energy stored that when the rocket is initially at rest it can propel it to 1 m/s, and by conservation of momentum the exhaust is propelled to -10 m/s. Conversely, if the rocket starts at 5 m/s then after “burning” the fuel the rocket is propelled to 6 m/s and the exhaust moves at -5 m/s.



        So now let’s check energy. In the first case the KE of the rocket increased from 0 J to 5 J, while in the second case it increased from 125 J to 180 J. The spring stores the same amount of energy in both cases, so why does the KE increase by 5 J at the low speed and by 55 J at the high speed?



        Notice that we forgot to calculate the energy that went into the exhaust. This is the pivotal mistake of most such analyses. In the first case the KE of the exhaust increased from 0 J to 50 J, while in the second case the KE was 12.5 J before and after. So in both cases the total change in KE (both the rocket and the exhaust) was 55 J.



        At low speeds most of the fuel’s energy is “wasted” in the KE of the exhaust. At higher speeds more goes into the rocket and less into the exhaust. For a real rocket, the same thing happens on a continuous basis. Both energy and momentum are conserved, and in fact more power is delivered to the vehicle as the speed increases under constant thrust.






        share|cite|improve this answer






















          up vote
          4
          down vote










          up vote
          4
          down vote









          The key point of this question is that it intuitively seems like conservation of energy is not working right. A rocket is powered by a chemical reaction that releases chemical energy at a constant rate. So how can a constant rate of energy release lead to a greater increase in KE when going fast?



          To understand this it is useful to consider a “toy model” rocket that operates on the same principles, but is easier to analyze. Specifically, let’s consider a 10 kg ball (rocket) and a 1 kg ball (exhaust) which is attached to a massless spring (fuel).



          Suppose this spring has enough energy stored that when the rocket is initially at rest it can propel it to 1 m/s, and by conservation of momentum the exhaust is propelled to -10 m/s. Conversely, if the rocket starts at 5 m/s then after “burning” the fuel the rocket is propelled to 6 m/s and the exhaust moves at -5 m/s.



          So now let’s check energy. In the first case the KE of the rocket increased from 0 J to 5 J, while in the second case it increased from 125 J to 180 J. The spring stores the same amount of energy in both cases, so why does the KE increase by 5 J at the low speed and by 55 J at the high speed?



          Notice that we forgot to calculate the energy that went into the exhaust. This is the pivotal mistake of most such analyses. In the first case the KE of the exhaust increased from 0 J to 50 J, while in the second case the KE was 12.5 J before and after. So in both cases the total change in KE (both the rocket and the exhaust) was 55 J.



          At low speeds most of the fuel’s energy is “wasted” in the KE of the exhaust. At higher speeds more goes into the rocket and less into the exhaust. For a real rocket, the same thing happens on a continuous basis. Both energy and momentum are conserved, and in fact more power is delivered to the vehicle as the speed increases under constant thrust.






          share|cite|improve this answer












          The key point of this question is that it intuitively seems like conservation of energy is not working right. A rocket is powered by a chemical reaction that releases chemical energy at a constant rate. So how can a constant rate of energy release lead to a greater increase in KE when going fast?



          To understand this it is useful to consider a “toy model” rocket that operates on the same principles, but is easier to analyze. Specifically, let’s consider a 10 kg ball (rocket) and a 1 kg ball (exhaust) which is attached to a massless spring (fuel).



          Suppose this spring has enough energy stored that when the rocket is initially at rest it can propel it to 1 m/s, and by conservation of momentum the exhaust is propelled to -10 m/s. Conversely, if the rocket starts at 5 m/s then after “burning” the fuel the rocket is propelled to 6 m/s and the exhaust moves at -5 m/s.



          So now let’s check energy. In the first case the KE of the rocket increased from 0 J to 5 J, while in the second case it increased from 125 J to 180 J. The spring stores the same amount of energy in both cases, so why does the KE increase by 5 J at the low speed and by 55 J at the high speed?



          Notice that we forgot to calculate the energy that went into the exhaust. This is the pivotal mistake of most such analyses. In the first case the KE of the exhaust increased from 0 J to 50 J, while in the second case the KE was 12.5 J before and after. So in both cases the total change in KE (both the rocket and the exhaust) was 55 J.



          At low speeds most of the fuel’s energy is “wasted” in the KE of the exhaust. At higher speeds more goes into the rocket and less into the exhaust. For a real rocket, the same thing happens on a continuous basis. Both energy and momentum are conserved, and in fact more power is delivered to the vehicle as the speed increases under constant thrust.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered 13 mins ago









          Dale

          1,039211




          1,039211




















              up vote
              2
              down vote













              There are multiple ways to view this.



              The easiest, I think, is that kinetic energy scales with the square of velocity
              $$K=frac 12 m v^2$$



              If we assume that the rocket booster supplies a constant acceleration, then comparing initial and final velocities we find that
              $$Delta v=v_final-v_init=at$$



              So for the same amount of time, the change in the velocity is the same, regardless of what the starting velocity actually is. Since we have a squared dependence on the velocity in $K$, this means that the kinetic energy increases more if we started out with a larger velocitiy. i.e.
              $$Delta K=frac 12 m v_final^2-frac 12 m v_init^2=frac 12 m (v_final-v_init)(v_final+v_init)=frac 12 m Delta v (Delta v+2v_init)$$



              So as we can see, the sum of the velocities in the expression for $Delta K$ is what contributes to a larger change in kinetic energy. Since the work done is equal to the change in kinetic energy, it must be that the rocket does more work when we start off at a larger velocity.



              The second way to view this, which you could argue is the same as the first, is to look at the definition of work
              $$W=intvec F cdot dvec x$$



              Or in one dimension with a constant force
              $$W=FDelta x$$



              Now, once again assuming a constant acceleration, we know that
              $$Delta x = frac 12 a t^2 + v_initt$$



              So that the work done is
              $$W=Fleft(frac 12 a t^2 + v_inittright)$$



              Once again, we see that the initial velocity determines the work. A qualitative explanation from this is that when the velocity is larger, then the object covers more distance in the same amount of time. So if we look at the time the force is being applied, the faster it is moving the larger distance the force is applied over. Therefore, we get more work done if the object is initially moving faster.



              The supposed issue behind all of this is that is seems like we are getting more energy from applying the same force for the same amount of time. But if you work through it you find that this is no issue at all. This is even true for objects falling near the Earth's surface. Even though the force is constant, gravity does more and more work on the object while it falls. Or in other words, the rate of energy conversion from potential to kinetic energy increases as the object falls.






              share|cite|improve this answer
























                up vote
                2
                down vote













                There are multiple ways to view this.



                The easiest, I think, is that kinetic energy scales with the square of velocity
                $$K=frac 12 m v^2$$



                If we assume that the rocket booster supplies a constant acceleration, then comparing initial and final velocities we find that
                $$Delta v=v_final-v_init=at$$



                So for the same amount of time, the change in the velocity is the same, regardless of what the starting velocity actually is. Since we have a squared dependence on the velocity in $K$, this means that the kinetic energy increases more if we started out with a larger velocitiy. i.e.
                $$Delta K=frac 12 m v_final^2-frac 12 m v_init^2=frac 12 m (v_final-v_init)(v_final+v_init)=frac 12 m Delta v (Delta v+2v_init)$$



                So as we can see, the sum of the velocities in the expression for $Delta K$ is what contributes to a larger change in kinetic energy. Since the work done is equal to the change in kinetic energy, it must be that the rocket does more work when we start off at a larger velocity.



                The second way to view this, which you could argue is the same as the first, is to look at the definition of work
                $$W=intvec F cdot dvec x$$



                Or in one dimension with a constant force
                $$W=FDelta x$$



                Now, once again assuming a constant acceleration, we know that
                $$Delta x = frac 12 a t^2 + v_initt$$



                So that the work done is
                $$W=Fleft(frac 12 a t^2 + v_inittright)$$



                Once again, we see that the initial velocity determines the work. A qualitative explanation from this is that when the velocity is larger, then the object covers more distance in the same amount of time. So if we look at the time the force is being applied, the faster it is moving the larger distance the force is applied over. Therefore, we get more work done if the object is initially moving faster.



                The supposed issue behind all of this is that is seems like we are getting more energy from applying the same force for the same amount of time. But if you work through it you find that this is no issue at all. This is even true for objects falling near the Earth's surface. Even though the force is constant, gravity does more and more work on the object while it falls. Or in other words, the rate of energy conversion from potential to kinetic energy increases as the object falls.






                share|cite|improve this answer






















                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  2
                  down vote









                  There are multiple ways to view this.



                  The easiest, I think, is that kinetic energy scales with the square of velocity
                  $$K=frac 12 m v^2$$



                  If we assume that the rocket booster supplies a constant acceleration, then comparing initial and final velocities we find that
                  $$Delta v=v_final-v_init=at$$



                  So for the same amount of time, the change in the velocity is the same, regardless of what the starting velocity actually is. Since we have a squared dependence on the velocity in $K$, this means that the kinetic energy increases more if we started out with a larger velocitiy. i.e.
                  $$Delta K=frac 12 m v_final^2-frac 12 m v_init^2=frac 12 m (v_final-v_init)(v_final+v_init)=frac 12 m Delta v (Delta v+2v_init)$$



                  So as we can see, the sum of the velocities in the expression for $Delta K$ is what contributes to a larger change in kinetic energy. Since the work done is equal to the change in kinetic energy, it must be that the rocket does more work when we start off at a larger velocity.



                  The second way to view this, which you could argue is the same as the first, is to look at the definition of work
                  $$W=intvec F cdot dvec x$$



                  Or in one dimension with a constant force
                  $$W=FDelta x$$



                  Now, once again assuming a constant acceleration, we know that
                  $$Delta x = frac 12 a t^2 + v_initt$$



                  So that the work done is
                  $$W=Fleft(frac 12 a t^2 + v_inittright)$$



                  Once again, we see that the initial velocity determines the work. A qualitative explanation from this is that when the velocity is larger, then the object covers more distance in the same amount of time. So if we look at the time the force is being applied, the faster it is moving the larger distance the force is applied over. Therefore, we get more work done if the object is initially moving faster.



                  The supposed issue behind all of this is that is seems like we are getting more energy from applying the same force for the same amount of time. But if you work through it you find that this is no issue at all. This is even true for objects falling near the Earth's surface. Even though the force is constant, gravity does more and more work on the object while it falls. Or in other words, the rate of energy conversion from potential to kinetic energy increases as the object falls.






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  There are multiple ways to view this.



                  The easiest, I think, is that kinetic energy scales with the square of velocity
                  $$K=frac 12 m v^2$$



                  If we assume that the rocket booster supplies a constant acceleration, then comparing initial and final velocities we find that
                  $$Delta v=v_final-v_init=at$$



                  So for the same amount of time, the change in the velocity is the same, regardless of what the starting velocity actually is. Since we have a squared dependence on the velocity in $K$, this means that the kinetic energy increases more if we started out with a larger velocitiy. i.e.
                  $$Delta K=frac 12 m v_final^2-frac 12 m v_init^2=frac 12 m (v_final-v_init)(v_final+v_init)=frac 12 m Delta v (Delta v+2v_init)$$



                  So as we can see, the sum of the velocities in the expression for $Delta K$ is what contributes to a larger change in kinetic energy. Since the work done is equal to the change in kinetic energy, it must be that the rocket does more work when we start off at a larger velocity.



                  The second way to view this, which you could argue is the same as the first, is to look at the definition of work
                  $$W=intvec F cdot dvec x$$



                  Or in one dimension with a constant force
                  $$W=FDelta x$$



                  Now, once again assuming a constant acceleration, we know that
                  $$Delta x = frac 12 a t^2 + v_initt$$



                  So that the work done is
                  $$W=Fleft(frac 12 a t^2 + v_inittright)$$



                  Once again, we see that the initial velocity determines the work. A qualitative explanation from this is that when the velocity is larger, then the object covers more distance in the same amount of time. So if we look at the time the force is being applied, the faster it is moving the larger distance the force is applied over. Therefore, we get more work done if the object is initially moving faster.



                  The supposed issue behind all of this is that is seems like we are getting more energy from applying the same force for the same amount of time. But if you work through it you find that this is no issue at all. This is even true for objects falling near the Earth's surface. Even though the force is constant, gravity does more and more work on the object while it falls. Or in other words, the rate of energy conversion from potential to kinetic energy increases as the object falls.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 54 mins ago









                  Aaron Stevens

                  2,850319




                  2,850319




















                      Pilchard123 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









                       

                      draft saved


                      draft discarded


















                      Pilchard123 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                      Pilchard123 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











                      Pilchard123 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                       


                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f428952%2fwhy-is-work-done-on-an-object-greater-at-higher-speeds%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest













































































                      Comments

                      Popular posts from this blog

                      What does second last employer means? [closed]

                      Installing NextGIS Connect into QGIS 3?

                      One-line joke