6.4 Conservative Versus Nonconservative Forces

[@Sassybeh]

Underrated channel ......Absolutely deserves millions of followers

[@mazenibrahim2815]

Absolutely amazing

[@rajeevanmkbakkalamrajeevan2200]

Thank you sir 😊

[@RohitKumar-ok4vl]

Work done by internal normal force during collision and explosion does work that is non conservative. But in some cases that is work done by normal force in sliding and work done by internal normal forces acting on pair of system moving together is conservative.

[@temesgengetahun5456]

it's nice . but i have a question on non conservative force ( it state leads to it dissipation of mechanical energy) , so what does it means

[@carultch]

Non-conservative forces could be defined in multiple ways: 1. The work done by the force will depend on the path the object takes, rather than exclusively its initial and final states/positions. 2. The work done by the force around a closed path, is not equal to zero 3. It is not viable to define a form of potential energy to keep track of the work done by a non-conservative force, because of the path-dependence of its work. 4. The actions of non-conservative forces are typically irreversible, and involve either the generation of heat/sound as energy leaves the mechanical domain, or an agent that supplies energy to the mechanical domain (e.g. work done by human muscle forces). 5. The curl of the vector field for the force is not equal to zero. This is a concept in vector calculus that formally defines whether a field is conservative or not.

[@demircan_demirbag]

Aaa :( I want to see the example of nonconservative normal force 10:47

[@carultch]

Usually in Physics, the normal force is approximated to be from something that is infinitely rigid, and therefore doesn't have a displacement associated with it. This would mean it is a zero work force, since it is perpendicular to any movement, or there is no movement. In reality, deformations occur in any structural element that gets loaded. Ideally, you would have elastic deformations, but eventually, materials go beyond the linear elastic regime of loading. One example would be ductile yielding, as it is called in material science. Suppose you have a metal beam, and you place an object on top of it that is heavy enough to permanently deform it, but not quite heavy enough to break it. The work the object does while descending to its rest position will be greater than the energy that can push upward while assisting you when removing the object. Energy is lost to thermal energy during permanent deformation once a material is loaded to the point of no return. Another example would be human pushes and pulls. The normal force itself isn't the reason it is non-conservative, but the human muscle force behind it is. The normal force is just the medium of the non-conservative force to apply it to the object.

[@devaki3579]

Thank you sir ✨

[@mimom8o]

conservative - gravity non - kinetic friction

[@geetadiyawar9268]

can I get a heart after 2 years of this video's upload???

[@unknownda2808]

No u can't

[@pankajsangwan80]

Good demonstration try to demonstrate dot product formula practically I am from india

[@mirusman2008]

thank you sir very helpfull

[@avirupghoshal9720]

Nice Video!

[@pradeepmuthukumarasamy6265]

thank you sir

[@nosleepdelirium1214]

how has no one mentioned that this is a youtube video of a youtube video 🤣

[@jeremiahmullikin]

I'm really trying hard to understand how work applies to an object when it is subject to both a conservative gravitational field and a theoretical non-conservative gravitational field at the same time.

[@carultch]

In Classical Physics, gravity is a conservative vector field. There is a concept called gravito-mangetism, that applies similar principles from electromagnetism to gravitation, but it isn't a perfect match. It ends up being a consequence of relativistic effects influencing how gravitational fields between objects that are moving relative to you at significant fractions of the speed of light, appear to experience a force between them that is the consequence of a non-conservative gravitational field. But if you look at it from their own reference frame, the gravitational field is conservative. Given a non-conservative field in general, the concept of potential energy is something that will not benefit you. You'd need to do dot product line integrals of the field along the path in question, to get the work done by the field on the object subjected to it.