2013-01-14 22:35:01 8 Comments

I'm having problems understanding the following situation. Suppose two 1-tonne cars are going with the same orientations but opposite senses, each 50 km/h with respect to the road. Then the total energy is

$$\begin{eqnarray}E=E_1+E_2&=&\frac{1\mathrm t\times(50\mathrm{km}/\mathrm h)^2}2+\frac{1\mathrm t\times(50\mathrm{km}/\mathrm h)^2}2\\&=&1\mathrm t\times(50\mathrm{km}/\mathrm h)^2\\&=&2500\frac{\mathrm t\times\mathrm{km}^2}{\mathrm h^2}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Now if we look at it from the point of view of one of the cars, then the total energy is

$$\begin{eqnarray}E=E_1+E_2&=&\frac{1\mathrm t\times(0\mathrm{km}/\mathrm h)^2}2+\frac{1\mathrm t\times(100\mathrm{km}/\mathrm h)^2}2\\&=&\frac{1\mathrm t\times(100\mathrm{km}/\mathrm h)^2}2\\&=&5000\frac{\mathrm t\times\mathrm{km}^2}{\mathrm h^2}.\end{eqnarray}.$$

I know that kinetic energy *is supposed* to change when I change the frame of reference. But I understand that then there must be some other kind of energy to make up for it so that the energy in the system stays unchanged. But I don't see any other kind of energy here. I only see two total energies of the same system that seem to be different. Could you explain this to me?

Please note that while I don't understand any physics, I do understand college level mathematics, so if necessary please use it. (I doubt anything more than high school maths should be needed here, but I want to say this just in case.)

### Related Questions

#### Sponsored Content

#### 2 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] Why doesn't energy conservation work for a moving box filling with rain?

**2017-11-06 20:51:12****Duck****200**View**1**Score**2**Answer- Tags: homework-and-exercises newtonian-mechanics momentum conservation-laws collision

#### 3 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] Why can't I use the law of conservation of energy here?

**2017-01-22 14:51:18****Dipsy****434**View**3**Score**3**Answer- Tags: homework-and-exercises newtonian-mechanics momentum conservation-laws collision

#### 5 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] Two identical disks pulled differently question (Kinetic Energy)

**2016-04-20 15:11:26****Code Doggo****243**View**2**Score**5**Answer- Tags: homework-and-exercises energy rotational-kinematics moment-of-inertia

#### 1 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] Kinetic Energy in the Center of Mass Frame

**2016-03-24 02:44:16****ubomb****4900**View**2**Score**1**Answer- Tags: newtonian-mechanics energy momentum inertial-frames

#### 1 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] Total energy of the fluid

**2016-02-18 16:36:54****alekhine****1509**View**0**Score**1**Answer- Tags: fluid-dynamics energy conservation-laws

#### 2 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] What's the right way to calculate power consumption over a month given a rate per minute?

**2015-10-26 02:40:56****user96242****498**View**1**Score**2**Answer- Tags: homework-and-exercises newtonian-mechanics energy power weight

#### 3 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] Rotating reference frames

**2014-03-17 16:42:39****staple****609**View**0**Score**3**Answer- Tags: newtonian-mechanics rotational-dynamics reference-frames simulations inertial-frames

#### 2 Answered Questions

### [SOLVED] Probability of having energy $E$ when $E$ is bounded

**2013-12-24 12:17:52****Sumit****249**View**0**Score**2**Answer- Tags: energy statistical-mechanics probability

## 4 comments

## @Anuj Khare 2017-01-03 17:23:24

conservation of energy is valid for a particular reference frame. suppose A has energy of 100J in frame 1 then if we apply a conservative force , then total energy of A will be 100j in frame 1. however, kinetic energy seen from frame 2 can be 80J initially and after the application of force that converts to some potential energy and some kinetic energy the total of which still remains 80J.

## @Jerry Schirmer 2013-01-14 23:00:37

You have successfully discovered that the kinetic energy depends on the reference frame.

That is actually true. What is amazing, however, is that the fact that kinetic energy is conserved is

NOTreference frame-dependent. So, when you balance your conservation of energy equation in the two frames, you'll find different numbers for the total energy, but you will also see that the energy before and after an elastic collision will be that same number.So, let's derive the conservation of energy in two reference frames. I'm going to model an elastic collision between two particles. In the first reference frame, I am going to assume that the second particle is stationary, and we have:

$$\begin{align} \frac{1}{2}m_{1}v_{i}^{2} + \frac{1}{2}m_{2}0^{2} &= \frac{1}{2}m_{1}v_{1}^{2} + \frac{1}{2}m_{2}v_{2}^{2}\\ m_{1}v_{i}^2 &= m_{1}v_{1}^{2} + m_{2}v_{2}^{2} \end{align}$$

to save myself time and energy, I'm going to call $\frac{m_{2}}{m_{1}} = R$, and we have:

$$v_{i}^{2} = v_{1}^{2} + Rv_{2}^{2}$$

Now, what happens if we shift to a different reference frame, moving to the right with speed v? This is essentially the same thing as subtracting $v$ from all of these terms. We thus have:

$$\begin{align} (v_{i}-v)^{2} + R(-v)^{2} &= (v_{1}-v)^{2} + R(v_{2}-v)^{2}\\ v_{i}^{2} -2v_{i}v + v^{2} + Rv^{2} &= v_{1}^{2} - 2 vv_{1} + v^{2} + Rv_{2}^{2}-2Rv_{2}v + Rv^{2}\\ v_{i}^{2} -2v_{i}v &= v_{1}^{2}- 2vv_{1} + Rv_{2}^{2}-2Rv_{2}v\\ v_{i}^{2} &= v_{1}^{2} + Rv_{2}^{2} + 2v(v_{i} - v_{1} - R v_{2}) \end{align}$$

So, what gives? It looks like the first equation, except we have this extra $2v(v_{i} - v_{1} - R v_{2})$ term? Well, remember that momentum has to be conserved too. In our first frame, we have the conservation of momentum equation (remember that the second particle has initial velocity zero:

$$\begin{align} m_{1}v_{i} + m_{2}(0) &= m_{1}v_{1} + m_{2}v_{2}\\ v_{i} &= v_{1} + Rv_{2}\\ v_{i} - v_{1} - Rv_{2} &=0 \end{align}$$

And there you go! If momentum is conserved in our first frame, then apparently energy is conserved in all frames!

## @Bartek 2013-01-14 23:17:18

I've deleted my previous comment because I think I misunderstood your answer. I will need to think more about this.

## @Jerry Schirmer 2013-01-14 23:34:03

@Bartek: I've written a greatly expanded answer that actually walks through the proof that energy is conserved in all frames.

## @Bzazz 2013-01-14 22:58:37

As you say, energy is

notinvariant under reference frame change.Imagine a moving ball. It has kinetic energy, but if I move in its reference frame, it doesn't. It's as simple as this.

There's no need to make up for the missing energy.

## @Bartek 2013-01-14 23:01:01

But here's what Wikipedia says: "The kinetic energy of any entity depends on the reference frame in which it is measured. However the total energy of an isolated system, i.e. one which energy can neither enter nor leave, does not change in whatever reference frame it is measured." Doesn't this mean we need something to make the energies equal?

## @nervxxx 2013-01-14 23:13:25

you are misinterpreting the statement. The statement is what Jerry Schirmer is saying. That is, the total energy of an isolated system, whatever value it might be in this reference frame, will not change a.k.a conservation of energy. of course the value of this energy in different frames is in general different. in fact, the article also goes on to say "Different observers moving with different reference frames disagree on the value of this conserved energy."

## @Bartek 2013-01-14 23:21:05

@nervxxx OK, so the

totalenergies can be different in different frames of reference, but whatever they are, they don't changeover timeif we look at them from the same point of view all of that time. Am I understanding it correctly? If so, this is mind-blowing to me, and I will need to think about this a lot!## @nervxxx 2013-01-15 00:24:42

@Bartek yup that is right!

## @user18764 2013-01-14 22:57:41

In newtonian mechanics, kinetic energy is reference frame dependent.

If this were a relativistic description, the rest mass of the system is invariant under boosts and rotations.