Re: Work-Energy or Work-Kinetic Energy??

["Rauber, Joel Phys" <RAUBERJ@mg.sdstate.edu>]

Three cheers for the below,

And to reiterate:
 I don't think the work-energy theorem is ambigous at all.  If you look at 
how it is derived; you see that Work of ALL forces acting on a point-like 
object = change in KINETIC ENERGY.

some of the "counter-examples" posed in previous posts omitted calculating 
the Work of ALL the forces and only calculated the Work of SOME of the 
forces acting on the object.

Joel
 ----------
From: Martha Takats
To: QuistO; RAUBERJ; phys-l
Subject: Re: Work-Energy or Work-Kinetic Energy??
Date: Thursday, November 06, 1997 1:31PM

The following distinction is made in most of the elementary texts I've
used:
Work of ALL forces (the net force) = change in kinetic energy
Work of all nonconservative forces = change in total energy
because effect of conservative forces is taken into account in the
potential energy terms. Some texts use W' for the work of
nonconservative forces.
I have always found these two W-E theorems equally useful.
One thing to remember is that the force YOU (or I) exert is
nonconservative.
 --
Martha Takats
Department of Physics and Astronomy
Ursinus College
Collegeville, PA 19426
 ------------------------- Original message header:
> MAIL FROM:<owner-phys-l@atlantis.uwf.edu>
> RCPT TO:<RAUBERJ@mg.sdstate.edu>
> RCPT TO:<QuistO@mg.sdstate.edu>
> DATA
> Received: from atlantis.uwf.edu (atlantis.uwf.edu [143.88.1.202]) by
Fafhrd.SDState.Edu (AIX4.2/UCB 8.7/8.7) with SMTP id KAA17302; Thu, 6 Nov
1997 10:43:06 -0600 (CST)
> Received: from atlantis.cc.uwf.edu (atlantis.uwf.edu [143.88.1.202]) by
atlantis.uwf.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA24735; Thu, 6 Nov 1997
11:34:30 -0600
> Received: from acad.ursinus.edu (acad.ursinus.edu [198.17.40.1]) by
atlantis.uwf.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA24701 for
<phys-l@mailer.uwf.edu>; Thu, 6 Nov 1997 11:29:42 -0600
> Received: from 198.17.40.68 by acad.ursinus.edu (MX V4.2 VAX) with SMTP; 
Thu,
>          06 Nov 1997 12:25:24 EST
> Message-Id: <3461C6AF.119B@acad.ursinus.edu>
> Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 13:31:27 +0000
> Reply-To: phys-l@atlantis.uwf.edu
> Sender: owner-phys-l@atlantis.uwf.edu
> Precedence: bulk
> From: Martha Takats <mtakats@acad.ursinus.edu>
> To: phys-l@atlantis.uwf.edu
> Subject: Re: Work-Energy or Work-Kinetic Energy??
> References: <SIMEON.9711061145.A@muahost.valpo.edu>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
> X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.2 -- ListProcessor by CREN
 ------------------------- End of message header.