Talk:Work (physics)/Archives/2009/October
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Work (physics). Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Negative work
I'm not a physics expert but I think something needs to be improved with reference to the content in the Introduction. "Work can be zero even when there is a force. The centripetal force in a uniform circular motion, for example, does zero work because the kinetic energy of the moving object doesn't change." What about a highly ellipical and extreme foci orbits like Halley's comet? My understanding is that work is done instantaneously (huge increases in kintetic energy) but only because negative work is also done (huge decreases in kinetic energy). --Chrisjwowen (talk) 13:53, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed that whole section is hardly an "introduction" since it only talks about where work isn't. Excuse the pun but that section needs work (extermination?) or renaming. Abtract (talk) 18:37, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- Chrisjwowen wrote What about a highly elliptical ... orbits (sic) like Halley's comet? The statement in the Introduction refers to uniform circular motion. An elliptical orbit is neither uniform nor circular. Dolphin51 (talk) 23:00, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- I agree that the "Introduction" was about zero work rather than about an introduction. I have renamed it Zero work and demoted it further down the page, after "Units". Dolphin51 (talk) 23:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)