Physics For Scientists and Engineers Foundations and Connections Extended Version With Modern 1St Edition Katz Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Physics for Scientists and Engineers
Foundations and Connections

Extended Version with Modern 1st
Edition Katz Solutions Manual
Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://testbankdeal.com/dow
nload/physics-for-scientists-and-engineers-foundations-and-connections-extended-ve
rsion-with-modern-1st-edition-katz-solutions-manual/
9
Energy in Nonisolated Systems
1. (a) Assuming we can ignore drag and gravitational force due to other objects such as
the Sun and the Moon, then the Earth and satellite are an isolated system.
(b) It seems we must include the Earth’s atmosphere because of the drag (and lift) on the
plane. So the system must include the atmosphere, the Earth, and the plane.
(c) Because of rolling friction and drag, we should include the Earth, the truck, the road,
and the surrounding air.
(d) The person jumps because of the force exerted by the floor, so the system consists of
the person, the Earth, and the floor.
2. There are only two forces applied to the object (paratrooper with parachute) – gravity
and drag. Because we approximate the speed to be constant, they are equal. We estimate
the mass of the paratrooper plus gear to be 100 kg and the distance 3000 ft as 1000 m.
FD = mg ≈ (100 kg)(9.81 m/s 2 ) ≈1000 N
Using Eq. 9.1, taking the drag force in the upward (positive) direction and the
displacement downward,
W = Fy Δy ≈ (1000 N)(−1000 m) ≈ −106 J
3. When the rider goes around the circle the instantaneous displacement is always
perpendicular to the centripetal force and therefore the work done by this force is zero.
9-1
2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or part.
Chapter 9 – Energy in Nonisolated Systems 9-2
4. (a)
Figure P9.4ANS
(b) The puck’s displacement is to the right in the positive x direction. The normal force
and gravity do not do work on the puck because they are perpendicular to the
displacement. The player does positive work on the puck. Apply equation 9.1.
W = Fx Δx
WP = FP Δx = ( 47.4 N ) ( 0.25 m ) = 12 J
(c) For a particle, we can apply the work-kinetic energy theorem to find the puck’s speed.
Solve Equation 9.2 for speed. The puck is initially at rest, so it has no kinetic energy.
Wtot = ΔK
1 2
WP = mv
2
2WP 2 ( 47.4 N ) ( 0.25 m )
v= = = 3.4 m/s
m 2.0 kg
(d) We convert 100 mph to 45 m/s. We find the speed of the puck here is well below the
maximum speed.
5. Assuming there is essentially no friction between the ice and the puck so that the puck
does not lose energy after leaving the player’s stick, then the work done by the coach
must equal the change in the puck’s kinetic energy. The final kinetic energy is zero, so
the change in kinetic energy is negative and equal (in value) to the amount of work done
by the player in Problem 4:
WC = −12 J
6. (a) Since the applied force is horizontal, it is in the direction of the displacement, and
the angle between them is θ = 0°. The work done by this force is then (Eq. 6.1)
WF = FxΔx
WF 5250 J
F= = = 350 N
Δx 15.0 m
(b) If the applied force is greater than 350 N, the crate would accelerate in the direction
of the force, so its speed would increase with time.
(c) If the applied force is less than 350 N, the crate would decelerate and eventually come
to rest.
7. To find the work performed by Kerry, use Eq. 9.6. The angle between the displacement
of the sled and his applied force is 30.0°.
W = ( 615 N ) ( 30.0 m ) cos ( 30.0°) = 1.60 × 104 J
8. In each case the system consists of the trailer, which we model as a particle. We may
apply the work-kinetic energy theorem: Wtot = ΔK .
(a) Gravity and the normal force don’t do work because they are perpendicular to the
displacement. Since rolling friction is negligible, the only force that does work on the
trailer is the truck. The trailer’s speed is constant, so the initial kinetic energy equals the
final kinetic energy. The work done is zero.
Wtot = ΔK = K f − Ki = 0
(b) We follow the same procedure as in part (a), but the trailer’s speed increases, so the
work done is positive.
1 1
Wtot = ΔK = K f − K i = mv 2f − 0 = (537 kg ) ( 24.7 m/s ) = 1.64 × 105 J
2
2 2
(c) Now gravity does work on the trailer so that the total work done is the sum of the
work done by the truck and by gravity. The total work must be zero because as in (a) the
trailer’s kinetic energy does not change. The work done by gravity comes from Equation
9.7, where the angle is between gravity and the displacement.
Wtot = WT + Wg = 0
WT = −Wg
WT = −Wg = −mgΔr cos ( 90° + 12.5°)
( )
WT = − (537 kg ) ( 9.81 m/s ) 2.30 × 103 m cos (102.5°) = 2.62 × 106 J
9. Both objects require forces that point to the west. Assuming the objects are restricted
to move in the east–west direction, the first object must have negative work performed on
it to bring it to a stop, and the same amount of positive work to give it the same final
speed to the West. Thus, the net amount of work on the first object is 0. The second
object requires a positive amount of work to attain the same speed to the west, since it
starts from rest. Thus, the second object requires a greater net amount of work.
10. (a) The system is the survivor, so there are two external forces (weight and rope
tension) acting on the system. We use Equation 9.6, with the same displacement of 12 m.
First, we calculate the weight of the survivor and the tension in the rope.
Fg = mg = (65.0 kg)(9.81 m/s2 )

FT = (1.15) Fg = (1.15)( 638 N )
The work can now be calculated for each. The displacement is parallel to the tension
force, so the work is positive. The displacement is antiparallel to the gravity force, so the
work is negative.
Wg = Fg Δr cos θ
Wg = Fg Δr cos180° = − Fg Δr = −(65.0 kg)(9.81 m/s 2 )(12.0 m) = −7.65 ×103 N ⋅ m
WT = FT Δr cos θ = FT Δr cos 0° = FT Δr = (1.15)( 638 N ) (12.0 m) = +8.80 ×103 N ⋅ m
Figure P9.10ANS
(b) We could calculate a net force and acceleration, but we can now also use energy
conservation to relate the net work on the survivor to the change in kinetic energy (Eq.
9.5). The total work is the sum of each of the contributions from part (a).
Wtot = Wg + Wh = −7.65 × 103 N ⋅ m + 8.80 × 103 N ⋅ m = 1.15 × 103 N ⋅ m
The initial velocity (and kinetic) energy are zero.
Wtot = ΔK = K f − 0 = 1.15 × 103 N ⋅ m
1 2
Kf = mv
2
v=
2K
=
2 1.15 × 103 N ⋅ m(= 5.95 m/s
)
m 65.0 kg

11. Taking the dot product of the two vectors A = 7.12iˆ + 2.00 ĵ − 3.90 k̂ and

B = 4.10iˆ − 11.00 ĵ using Eq. 9.10,
 
A i B = ( 7.12 ) ( 4.10 ) + ( 2.00 ) ( −11.00 ) + ( −3.90 ) ( 0 ) = 7.19
12. Given the force in component form and a single component of the displacement, it is
possible to use Eq. 9.17 in order to solve for the unknown displacement in the y direction.
W = Fx Δx + Fy Δy
10,125 J = ( 512 N )( 25.0 m ) + ( −134 N )( Δy )
(134 N )( Δy ) = 12,800 J − 10,125 J
Δy = 20.0 m
 
13. Use the fact that A makes an angle θ A and vector B makes an angle θ B with the x
axis to find the angle ϕ between the two vectors and substitute into Equation 9.7.
ϕ = θ A + θB
D = ABcosϕ = ABcos(θ A + θ B )
A trigonometric identity (Appendix A) enables us to expand the cosine term.

D = AB(cosθ A cosθ B − sin θ A sin θ B )
D = Acosθ A Bcosθ B + ( Asin θ A ) (− Bsin θ B )
Use Figure 9.7 to identify the scalar components.

D = Ax Bx + Ay By
14. (a) Each vector makes the same angle α with the x axis. This can be seen from the
fact that the components of both vectors involve this single angle. So the angle between
them is zero and the vectors are parallel.
(b)
Figure P9.14ANS
15. (a) Each vector makes the same angle 15° with the x axis. This can be seen from the
fact that the components of both vectors involve this single angle. The angle between
them is zero, and the vectors are parallel.
(b)
Figure P9.15ANS
16. In each case we apply Equation 9.8, D = AB cos ϕ .
Case 1: The angle is 26.5°. D = ( 6.00 ) ( 3.00 ) cos 26.5° = 16.1
Case 2: The angle is 26.5° + 90°. D = ( 6.00 ) ( 3.00 ) cos116.5° = −8.03

Case 3: The vectors are antiparallel, so the angle is 180°.
D = ( 6.00 ) ( 3.00 ) cos180° = −18.0
17. We first sketch the problem to specify our coordinate system and indicate the relevant
components of the vectors. We choose the x direction to align with the ramp. We will
also need the force on the cart (its weight):
(
w = mg = (1.30 kg ) 9.81 m/s 2 = 12.8 N )

(a) We are asked first to use Equation 9.15. The displacement is Δr = −2.4 iˆ m , therefore
we need the component of the force along the x direction. We find the x component of the
weight using trigonometry and our sketch.
W = F Δr
F = Fg ,x = −wsin15° − (12.8 N ) sin15° = 3.31 N
We can now calculate the work,

W = F Δr = (−3.31 N)(−2.4 m) = 7.9 J
Figure P9.17ANS
(b) Here, we are asked to use Equation 9.16. Using the figure, we determine the
downward component of the displacement, which points in the same direction as the
weight force, and calculate the work.
W = FΔr
Δr = Δr cos75° = ( −2.4 m ) cos75° = −0.62 m
W = Fg Δr = ( −12.8 N ) ( −0.62 m ) = 7.9 J
(c) Finally, we use Equation 9.17. We know the x components of displacement and
weight from part (a). The displacement has no y component, and we can determine the y
component of the weight.
W = Fx Δx + Fy Δy + Fz Δz
Fx = −3.31 N
Fy = wsin(255°) = (12.8 N)sin(255°) = −12.4 N
Δx = −2.4 m
Δy = 0
W = Fx Δx + Fy Δy = ( −3.31 N )( −2.4 m ) + ( −12.4 N )( 0 ) = 7.9 J
The work is the same in each case, as we should expect.

18. We start with a general expression for the vector A = Ax iˆ + Ay ĵ + Az k̂ and compute
the desired quantity.
 
A⋅ A = Ax Ax + Ay Ay + Az Az = Ax2 + Ay2 + Az2 = A2
In the last step, we used Eq. 3.11, A = Ax2 + Ay2 + Az2 .

19. We start with general expression for the vectors A = Ax iˆ + Ay ĵ + Az k̂ and

B = Bx iˆ + By ĵ + Bz k̂ and calculate both dot products (Eq. 9.11).
 
A i B = Ax Bx + Ay By + Az Bz
   
B i A = Bx Ax + By Ay + Bz Az = Ax Bx + Ay By + Az Bz = A i B
In the last step, we use the fact that multiplication is commutative.

20. We start with general expression for the vectors A = Ax iˆ + Ay ĵ + Az k̂ ,
 
B = Bx iˆ + By ĵ + Bz k̂ and C = Cx iˆ + C y ĵ + Cz k̂ and calculate both sides of the expression.
 
To calculate the left-hand side, first add B and C ,
 
( )
B + C = ( Bx + Cx ) iˆ + By + C y ĵ + ( Bz + Cz ) k̂
Then, carry out the dot product (Eq. 9.11) and use the fact that multiplication is
commutative.
  
Ai (B + C ) = A (B + C ) + A (B + C ) + A (B + C )
x x x y y y z z z
  
Ai (B + C ) = A B + A C + A B + A C + A B + A C
x x x x y y y y z z z z
(1)
Now, for the right-hand side, take both dot products and add.
   
(
A i B + A i C = Ax Bx + Ay By + Az Bz + Ax Cx + Ay C y + Az Cz
   
) ( )
A i B + A i C = Ax Bx + Ax Cx + Ay By + Ay C y + Az Bz + Az Cz (2)
Comparing equations 1 and 2, we have found the desired result.

 
21. Equation 9.8 involves the magnitudes A and B, and the angle ϕ between A and B ,
which we must determine from the figure. We calculate the magnitudes of the vectors
with the Pythagorean theorem.
A = Ax2 + Ay2 = 2.02 + 5.02 = 29 = 5.4
B = Bx2 + By2 = (−4.0)2 + (−3.0)2 = 5.0
We use trigonometry to find the angles θ A and θ B , and then find their difference to
get ϕ .
⎛ 5.0 ⎞
θ A = tan −1 ⎜ = 68.2°
⎝ 2.0 ⎟⎠
⎛ −3.0 ⎞
θ B = tan −1 ⎜ + 180° = 217°
⎝ −4.0 ⎟⎠
ϕ = θ B − θ A = 217° − 68.2° = 149°
Using, Eq. 9.8,
D = ABcosθ = 5.0 29 cos149° = −23
 
22. Equation 9.10 requires the scalar components of A and B , which we read off the
figure.
Ax = 2.0 and Ay = 5.0

Bx = −4.0 and By = −3.0
D = Ax Bx + Ay By = (2.0)(−4.0) + (5.0)(−3.0) = −23
23. Since we have our displacement in unit-vector notation, we can use the dot product
formula for work given in Equation 9.17. First, we determine the components of the
force.
Fx = F cosθ = ( 4.75 N ) cos60°

Fy = F sin θ = ( 4.75 N ) sin 60°
Fz = 0
Reading off the components of the displacement vector:
Δx = 4.2, Δy = −2.1, Δz = 1.6
We can now insert these values into the formula for work.
W = Fx Δx + Fy Δy + Fz Δz
( ) (
W = ( 4.75 N ) cos60° ( 4.2 m ) + ( 4.75 N ) sin60° ( −2.1 m ) + ( 0 ) (1.6 m ) )
W = 1.3 J
24. Work done is the area under the force versus position curve between the initial and
final positions. If the force and displacement are parallel, the work done is positive. If
they are antiparallel, the work done is negative. The relative directions of the force and
displacement are also shown for each case. The total work in each case is:
W1 = +30 J
W2 = +25 J
W3 = −250 J
Figure P9.24ANS
25. We do not know the magnitude of the force acting on the object in this problem.
Although we could take the derivative to find the velocity and then the acceleration,
calculate the force, and integrate over distance to find the work, we can take an easier
path and use the work-energy theorem (Eq. 9.5). We do need the initial and final speeds,
so we do have to take one derivative of the formula for position.
dx
v= = 5.0 + 4.0t
dt
Now, determine the speeds at the initial and final times.
vi = 5.0 + 4.0(2.0 s) = 13 m/s

v f = 5.0 + 4.0(7.0 s) = 33 m/s
Finally, use the work-energy theorem.
1 1 1
W = ΔK = mv f 2 − mvi 2 = (5.8 kg ) ⎡(33 m/s ) − (13 m/s ) ⎤ = 2.7 ×103 J
2 2
2 2 2 ⎣ ⎦
26. In all three cases, the work equals the area under the force versus position curve,
which is equivalent to the integral of force over distance.
(a) This is the area of a rectangle. It is positive because the force and displacement are
both positive. (Or, graphically, the rectangle is above the x axis.)
Wa = (15.0 N ) (5.00 m ) = 75.0 J
(b) This is the area of a triangle. It is negative because the force is in the opposite
direction as the displacement (graphically, the triangle is below the x axis).
1
Wb =
2
( −15.0 N )(10.0 m ) = −75.0 J
(c) This is the sum of the work found in parts (a) and (b), or the area of the rectangle plus
the area of the triangle.
Wc = Wa + Wb = 75.0 N ⋅ m − 75.0 N ⋅ m = 0
27. According to the work-kinetic energy theorem for a particle, the change in kinetic
energy equals the total work done found in Problem 26.
(a) ΔKa = Wa = 75.0 J
(b) ΔKb = Wb = −75.0 J
(c) ΔKc = Wc = 0
28. (a) The plot is made from Hooke’s law: Fx = −kx = − (345 N/m ) x .
12750
7750
2750
F (N)
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10

-2250 0 10 20 30 40 50
-7250
-12250
-17250
x (m)
Figure P9.28ANS
(b) The area under the curve (the triangle) is equal to the work done.
1
W= (35.0 m )( −12250 N ) = −2.14 ×105 J
2
(c) Since the force varies (according to Hooke’s law), we need to integrate.
xf x f =35.0 x f =35.0
W= ∫ F dx = ∫ ( −kx ) dx = − (345 N/m ) ∫

xi
x
xi =0 xi =0
x dx
1 ⎛ 345 N/m ⎞ 2
W = − ( 345 N/m ) x 2 ( )
xf
= −⎜ ⎟ x f − xi
2
2 xi
⎝ 2 ⎠
⎛ 345 N/m ⎞
W = −⎜
⎝ 2 ⎠
(
⎟ ( 35.0 m ) − 0 = −2.11×10 J
2 5
)
The result is consistent with part (b), as expected.
29. The force varies with position, so we must integrate using Equation 9.21.
rf  
( )
rf
W = ∫ F i d r = ∫ Fx dx + Fy dy + Fz dz
ri ri
We need to determine the initial and final positions of the object in order to evaluate the
integral. Let’s set the origin at the initial point of the path.
xi = 0; yi = 0
x f = r cos θ = ( 550.0 m ) cos ( 67.5° ) = 210.5 m
y f = r sin θ = ( 550.0 m ) sin ( 67.5° ) = 508.1 m
Now, express the integral that we need to evaluate.
x=210.5; y=508.1
( 4x dx − 6 y dy ) = 43 x
210.5 508.1
W= ∫ − 3 y2
2 3
0 0
x=0; y=0
4
⎡(210.5)3 − 0 ⎤ − 3 ⎡(508.1) − 0 ⎤ N ⋅ m = 1.166 × 107 J
2
W=
3⎣ ⎦ ⎢⎣ ⎥⎦
 
30. In each case, the work is found using the integral of F i dr along the path (Equation
9.21).
rf  
( )
rf
ri ri

(a) The work done along path 1, we first need to integrate along dr = dx iˆ from (0,0) to

(7,0) and then along dr = dy ĵ from (7,0) to (7,4):
x=7; y=0 x=7; y=4

W1 = ∫
x=0; y=0
(3y 2
)( )
iˆ + x ĵ i dx iˆ + ∫
x=7; y=0
(3y 2
)( )
iˆ + x ĵ i dy ĵ
Performing the dot products, we get
x=7; y=0 x=7; y=4

2
W1 = ∫ 3y dx + ∫ x dy
x=0; y=0 x=7; y=0
Along the first part of this path, y = 0 therefore the first integral equals zero. For the
second integral, x is constant and can be pulled out of the integral, and we can evaluate
dy.
x=7; y=4 x=7; y=4

W1 = 0 + ∫ x dy = xy = 28 J
x=7; y=0
x=7; y=0

(b) The work done along path 2 is along dr = dy ĵ from (0,0) to (0,4) and then along

dr = dx iˆ from (0,4) to (7,4):
x=0; y=4 x=7; y=4

W2 = ∫
x=0; y=0
(3y 2
)( )
iˆ + x ĵ i dy ĵ + ∫
x=0; y=4
(3y 2
)( )
iˆ + x ĵ i dx iˆ
Performing the dot product, we get:
x=0; y=4 x=7; y=4

2
W2 = ∫ x dy + ∫ 3y dx
x=0; y=0 x=0; y=4
Along the first part of this path, x = 0. Therefore, the first integral equals zero. For the
second integral, y is constant and can be pulled out of the integral, and we can evaluate
dx.
x=7; y=4
2
W2 = 0 + 3y x = 336 J
x=0; y=4
(c) To find the work along the third path, we first write the expression for the work
integral.
rf  
( )
rf
ri ri
(3y dx + x dy )
rf
W=∫ 2
(1)
ri
At first glance, this appears quite simple, but we can’t integrate ∫ x dy = xy like we
might have above because the value of x changes as we vary y (i.e., x is a function of y).
[In parts (a) and (b), on a straight horizontal or vertical line, only x or y changes.] One
approach is to parameterize both x and y as a function of another variable, say t, and write
an integral that depends only on t. We take another approach here: relate x and y to write
each integral in terms of only x or y. Constraining dr to be along the desired line, we can
relate dx and dy:
dy
tanθ =
dx
dy
dy = tanθ dx and dx = (2)
tanθ
Now, use equation (2) in (1) to express each integral in terms of only one variable.
x=7; y=4 x=7; y=4
W= ∫ 3y dx + ∫
2
x dy
x=0; y=0 x=0; y=0
y=4 x=7
dy
W = ∫ 3y + ∫ x tan θ dx
2
y=0
tan θ x=0
We can determine the tangent of the angle, which is constant (the angle is the angle of the
line with respect to the horizontal).
4.00
tanθ = = 0.570
7.00
Insert the value of the tangent and solve the integrals.

y=4 x=7
3 y3 x2
W= + 0.570
0.570 3 y=0
2 x=0
W = 112 + 14 = 126 J
(d) Since the work done is not “path-independent”, this is a non-conservative force.
Figure P9.30ANS
31. After sketching the forces on the object, we can determine the length of each
extended spring in terms of the x displacement of the object.
r = x 2 + 2 (1)
We determine the work by integrating Eq. 9.21. Since the displacement is only in the x
direction, only the x component of the force factors in to the calculation of the work done.
( F dx + F dy ) = ∫ ( F dx + 0)
rf rf
W=∫ x y x
(2)
ri ri
The magnitude of the force for each spring can be determined, as well as the x
component.
F1 = k1 ( r −  ) F1x = − F1 cos θ
à (3)
F2 = k2 ( r −  ) F2 x = − F2 cos θ
We can also use trigonometry to write the cosine in terms of our integration variable x.
x x
cosθ = = (4)
r x 2 + 2
Substituting equations (1) and (4) into (3),
k1x
F1x = −k1x =
x 2 + 2
k2 x
F2 x = −k2 x =
x 2 + 2
The total force is the sum of these contributions.
(k1 + k2 )x
Fx = −(k1 + k2 )x + (5)
x 2 + 2
Finally, substituting (5) into (2) and integrating,
xdx
W = ∫ Fx dx = − ( k1 + k2 ) ∫ x dx + ( k1 + k2 )  ∫
xf xf xf
xi 0 0
x 2 + 2
1
W =−
2
( k1 + k2 ) x 2f + ( k1 + k2 ) ⎡⎢  x 2f + 2 − 2 ⎤⎥
⎣ ⎦
We can check this in two limiting cases. If there is no displacement ( x f = 0 ), we find no

work done. If the displacement is very large compared to the relaxed length of the springs
x f >>  , then the first term dominates, which is what we would expect if the springs
were horizontal.
Figure P9.31ANS
32. (a) The combined dimensions on the right must be force (same as the dimension on
the left.) So A must have the dimensions of force times length squared. The force cannot
be negative because A is positive, and r2 must be positive.
 
F =  A 
   2
 r 
 A = F ⋅ L2 or units of N ⋅ m 2
 
(b)
Figure P9.32ANS
(c) Since the force is not constant, we integrate over distance to find the work (Eq. 9.21).
The force and infinitesimal displacement are in the same direction.
rf   rf A  r f dr
W = ∫ F i d r = ∫ 2 ( r̂ i dr ) = A ∫ 2
ri ri r ri r
r f =2r0
⎛ 1⎞ ⎛ 1 1⎞ A
W = A⎜ − ⎟ = − A⎜ − ⎟=
⎝ r ⎠ r =r ⎝ 2r0 r0 ⎠ 2r0
i 0
(d) The work done by the force on the particle is positive since the force and
displacement are in the same direction (positive), and energy is transferred to the particle.
Here the particle moves outward though, while in Example 9.5 the particle moves inward.
Had the particle in Example 9.5 moved outward (away from the planet), then the work
done by gravity would have been negative, since the force is inward toward the planet.
This problem looks similar to the force between two positive charges, which we will
encounter later in the book.
33. This is a lot like Example 9.6. The main difference is the path is a closed. We sketch
a path that has two straight parts (A and C) and two curved parts (B and D). The curved
parts are circular with a smaller radius r1 and a larger radius r2 . We will find the work
rf  
done along each leg using W = ∫ F i d r (Eq. 9.31) and then add them together. The
ri
Mm
magnitude of the gravitational force is Fg = G .
r2
For paths A and C, the gravitational force is antiparallel/parallel to the displacement

respectively, so the dot product is negative/positive. The work done by gravity on path A
is then
r f =r2
 ⎛ Mm ⎞ ⎡1 1⎤
Fg ( r̂ i dr ) = −
rf
WA = ∫ ∫ ⎜⎝ G r 2 ⎟⎠ dr = GMm ⎢ r − r ⎥
ri
ri =r1 ⎣ 2 1⎦
For path C, we are integrating along a path dr ′ = −dr . That is, we are integrating along a
“dx” from a larger radius to a smaller radius, but we’ve defined our formulas using an r
that points in the opposite direction. The total work done by gravity along path A is
negative and along path C is positive.
r f =r1
 ⎛ Mm ⎞ ⎡1 1 ⎤ ⎡1 1⎤
Fg ( r̂ i dr ) = ⎜⎝ G r 2 ⎟⎠ ( −dr ) = GMm ⎢ r − r ⎥ = −GMm ⎢ r − r ⎥
rf
WC = ∫ ∫
ri
ri =r2 ⎣ 1 2⎦ ⎣ 2 1⎦
For paths B and D, the displacement is everywhere perpendicular to the force. Therefore,
the dot product and the work are zero.
WB = 0
WD = 0
Finally, we can add all four contributions to the work and find that the total work is
indeed zero.
Wtot = WA + WB + WC + WD
⎡1 1⎤ ⎡1 1⎤
Wtot = GMm ⎢ − ⎥ +0 − GMm ⎢ − ⎥ +0 = 0
⎣ r2 r1 ⎦ ⎣ r2 r1 ⎦
Figure P9.33ANS
34. (a) The man is exerting a force to compensate for friction. Since this force is in the
direction of the displacement, the work he performs is positive.
(b) The man is exerting no force on the stroller in order to keep it moving at a constant
velocity. Therefore, the work done by the man is zero.
(c) The man is exerting a force against gravity to prevent the stroller from accelerating
downhill. The displacement is downhill, and his force is directed uphill. The work he
does is negative.
(d) The man is exerting a force against the wall. Since there is no displacement of the
wall, there is no work done, and zero is the correct answer.
35. The sled must be speeding up since Paul is applying a tangential force. The sled has
both a centripetal acceleration toward the center due to the rope and a tangential
acceleration causing the sled to speed up.
Figure P9.35ANS
36. (a) The work done by gravity is found by multiplying the gravitational force (weight
= mg) by the distance fallen. We take the downward direction to be positive.
−3 2
WG = FyΔy = mgh = (2.15×10 kg)(9.81 m/s )(145 m) = 3.06 J
(b) Since the hailstone is falling at constant speed, air resistance must be balancing the
force of gravity, or FR = –mg (assuming downward is positive). Then,
WR = −WG = −3.06 J
37. (a) There are three forces exerted on the block: gravity, the normal force, and static
friction.
Figure P9.37ANS
(b) The Earth is in the system, so it cannot do work on the system. The normal force is
perpendicular to the block’s displacement, and it does no work. Static friction’s point of
application moves with the block. In this case, static friction is in the same direction as
the block’s displacement.
WS = Fs Δx
Apply Newton’s second law to find the magnitude of static friction. The weight is 26.7 N.
∑F x
= Fs − Fg sin12.0° = 0
Fs = Fg sin12.0° = ( 26.7 N ) sin12.0° = 5.55 N
Finally, calculating the work,
WS = Fs Δx = (5.55 N ) ( 2.45 m ) = 14 J
38. (a) There are two forces exerted on the block: gravity and the normal force. The block
is moving horizontally and not accelerating, so there must be no static friction force
(which would lead to a net force).
Figure P9.38ANS
(b) The Earth is in the system, so it cannot do work on the system. The normal force is
perpendicular to the block’s displacement, and it does no work. There is no static friction.
No force does work on the system.
Wtot = 0
(c) There is no change in the system’s kinetic or potential energy (the belt is flat), so there
is no work done on the system. The difference between this problem and the previous
one is that the system’s energy does not increase here, and no energy is transferred from
the environment (in the form of work done by static friction).
39. (a) For the 3.00 kg of apples, using Hooke’s law, F = ky,
2
Mg (3.00 kg)(9.81 m/s ) 2
k= = = 9.81×10 N/m
y 0.03 m
Using the same spring constant for 5.00 kg of apples, the extension is
2
mg (5.00 kg)(9.81 m/s )
y= = 2
= 0.0500 m = 5.00 cm
k 9.81×10 N/m
(b) Using Equation 9.25, with an initial extension of 0 and a final extension y = 0.07 m,
the work is
1 1
W = ky 2 = (9.81×102 N/m)(0.07 m)2 = 2.40 J
2 2
40. A sketch shows the displacement of each link. The work done by gravity comes from
applying Equation 9.15. Because the force and displacement are both downward, the
work done by gravity is positive. Since we anticipate that the final answer will depend
only on the center of mass displacement, we will write the displacement of each link in in
terms of the displacement of the center link:
W1 = mg (Δy3 − 2D)
W2 = mg (Δy3 − D)
W3 = mg Δy3
W4 = mg (Δy3 + D)
W5 = mg (Δy3 + 2D)
Here, Δy3 = ΔyCM, so adding all five contributions to the total work and defining the total
mass of the chain as M = 5m, we get
W = W1 + W2 + W3 + W4 + W5 = 5mgΔy3
W = MgΔyCM
Figure P9.40ANS
41. (a) We sketch a free-body diagram with the normal force, gravity, and kinetic friction
force. Writing Newton’s second law for the block which is not accelerating:
∑F x = Fg sin θ − Fk = 0 → Fk = Fg sin θ (1)

∑F y = FN − Fg cos θ = 0 → FN = Fg cos θ (2)
Write an expression for kinetic friction in terms of the normal force. Then, substitute
equation (1).
Fk = µk FN = Fg sin θ (3)
Divide equation (3) by equation (2) and solve for θ.
µk FN Fg sin θ
=
FN Fg cos θ
µk = tan θ
θ = tan −1 µk = tan −1 0.200 = 11.3°
Figure P9.41ANS
(b) When the wooden block slides down the wooden incline, there is an increase in the
thermal energy of both surfaces due to kinetic friction. It is impractical to divide this into
two separate components, and it best to just include both in the system such that all of the
thermal energy is internal to the system.
(c) The increase in thermal energy comes from Equation 9.29.
( )
ΔEth = Fk s = Fg sin θ s = ( mg sin θ ) s
( )
ΔEth = ( 4.50 kg ) 9.81 m/s 2 ( sin11.3°) ( 2.35 m ) = 19.8 J ≅ 20.3 J
42. Internal energy is just potential energy and kinetic energy on a small scale involving
many more particles than is practical to calculate directly. Terms like microenergy
(small-scale energy) or multi-particle energy (many-particle energy) might convey why
we might lump all of this energy together in an “internal” energy.
43. Beginning with the work-energy theorem (Eq. 9.31), the bus experiences a change of
kinetic energy due to the friction force, which results in the dissipation of thermal energy.
K i = K f + ΔEth
2
⎛ m⎞
1 1
(
ΔEth = −ΔK = mvi2 = 6.0 × 103 kg ⎜ 25 ⎟ = 1.9 × 106 J
2 2 ⎝ s⎠
)
44. Consider a box sliding across a tabletop with friction. As the box slides, points of
contact form weak bonds between the box and tabletop momentarily. These bonds are
broken and others reform (Chapter 6). Therefore, microscopic friction forces are applied
as the surface and are displaced less than the box’s center of mass, so accounting for
these deformations is not straightforward. Fortunately, when we choose to include both
surfaces in the system, this complication is irrelevant.
45. We use conservation of energy and start with the work-energy theorem (Eq. 9.31). In
this case, there is no potential energy or outside work performed on the system. The
initial kinetic energy is that of the bullet, while the final kinetic energy is that of the
bullet/wooden-block object traveling at the final speed. Some thermal (internal) energy
may also be produced in an inelastic collision. We can sketch a corresponding energy bar
chart as well.
K i = K f + Eth
1 1
mbvb2 = ( mb + mwb ) v 2f + ΔEth
2 2
Now, solve for the final speed.
mb vb2 − 2ΔEth
vf =
mb + mwb
The thermal energy generated is related to the non-elasticity of the collision, which we
will encounter later in the text. Larger thermal energy dissipation corresponds to a more
inelastic collision and a smaller the final velocity.
Figure P9.45ANS
46. This is identical to Problem 45, except that the wooden block has an initial speed vwb ,
which contributes to the initial kinetic energy of the system. Starting with Equation 9.31
and following the same steps as in the previous problem,
K i = K f + ΔEth
1 1 1
mb vb2 + mwb vwb
2
= ( mb + mwb ) v 2f + ΔEth
2 2 2
mbvb2 + mwbvwb
2
− 2ΔEth
vf =
mb + mwb
As above, more thermal energy dissipation corresponds to a more inelastic collision, and
a smaller to the final velocity.
47. (a) Since friction is negligible on the downhill, we can use conservation of energy.
The gravitational potential energy of the car is converted to kinetic energy as the car falls
to the bottom of the hill. We set the final height to be zero, therefore the final potential
energy is zero, and we calculate the initial potential energy. We also sketch a bar chart to
keep track of the energy.
U i = mgy = (750.0 kg)(9.81 m/s 2 )(80.7 m) = 5.94 × 105 J
The initial kinetic energy is zero. We can now use Equation 9.26.
(K f − K i ) + (U f − U i ) = 0
(K f − 0 ) + 0 − 5.94 × 105 J = 0
( )
K f = 5.94 × 10 J 5
Using the definition of kinetic energy, we can now determine the final speed.
1 2
Kf = mv
2 f
vf =
2K f
=
(
2 5.94 × 105 J ) = 39.8 m/s
m 750.0 kg
(This is over 89 mph! This value is reasonable, though, when compared to Example
8.10.)
Figure P9.47ANS
(b) By defining the system as the plastic track and the roller coaster’s wheels, we can use
the work-energy theorem to calculate the change in thermal energy. Use Equation 9.31 to
solve for ΔEth . Since the coaster is at the same height (yf = yi) during the last stretch on
the track, the potential energy does not change. By our choice of system, there are no
external forces doing work, i.e., Wtot = 0. The roller coaster has stopped at our final
configuration, Kf = 0. Therefore, ΔEth is equal to the initial kinetic energy, which we
calculated in part (a).
Ki + U gi + Wtot = K f + U gf + ΔEth
ΔEth = Ki = 5.94 ×105 J
(c) The change in thermal energy occurs as frictional force does work on the system. By
the work-energy theorem and Equation 9.29 we can equate the change in thermal energy
to the work done by the friction force between the car’s wheels and the plastic track.
ΔEth = Fk s = 5.94 ×105 J
Substitute in the equation for kinetic friction Fk = µk FN and solve for the coefficient of
kinetic friction. Here s = 230.66 m and FN = mg.
µk mg (230.66 m) = 5.94 ×105 J

5.94 ×105 J
µk = = 0.350
( 230.66 m )( 750. kg ) 9.81 m/s 2 ( )
48. If the system is isolated, Wtot = 0 , and because only conservative forces act, ΔEth = 0 .
Combing the potential energy terms, U i = U gi + U si , we confirm that the two equations
are equivalent.
49. For a particle, there can be no internal energy, ΔEth = 0 . Combining potential energy
terms, U i = U gi + U si , and expressing the final minus initial values as differences, we
confirm that the two equations are equivalent.
50. (a) It is best to include both the box and the track’s surface because kinetic friction
increases both of their thermal energies and including both keeps all of this thermal
energy internal to the system. We have also included the Earth and the spring, to account
for them in terms of changes in gravitational and elastic potential energy, with nothing
left outside the system to do work. A bar chart of the initial and final energies can help
organize which energies need to be taken into account.
Figure P9.50ANS
(b) The reference configuration for the spring is when it is relaxed, and for gravity it is
when the box is at the bottom of the ramp. We use the work-energy theorem (Eq. 9.31).
The box is initially at rest ( Ki = 0) , there are no external forces (Wtot = 0) , and in the
final situation, the box is again at rest at the reference height and the spring is relaxed
(K f = 0, Usf = 0, U gf = 0) .
Ki + U gi + U si + Wtot = K f + U gf + U sf + ΔEth
U gi + U si = ΔEth
The spring is initially compressed a distance x, and the box slides a total distance x on the
upper surface and d on the lower surface. Inserting formulas for the gravitational
potential energy, spring potential energy, and thermal energy (Eq. 9.1, 9.25, 9.29),
1
mgy + kx 2 = Fk s
2
1 2
mgy + kx = Fk ( x + d ) (1)
2
The y displacement is found from trigonometry.
y = (1.8 m ) sin40° = 1.16 m (2)
Kinetic friction (only on the horizontal surfaces in this problem) is proportional to the
normal force, which equals the weight.
Fk = µk FN = µk mg (3)
Solve Equations (1) – (3) for distance d.
y 1 kx 2
d= + −x
µ k 2 µ k mg
1.16 m 1 ( 345 N/m ) ( 0.30 m )

2
d= + − 0.30 m = 9.97 m = 10 m
0.35 2 ( 0.35) ( 0.65 kg ) 9.81 m/s 2 ( )
51. Refer to Problem 50, which is identical except that the slope is frictionless.
(a) This is very similar to the previous problem. The only difference is now there is
friction along the entire track. It is best to include both the box and the track’s surface
because of kinetic friction increases both of their thermal energies. We have also included
the Earth and the spring, to account for them in terms of changes in gravitational and
elastic potential energy, with nothing left outside the system to do work. A bar chart of
the initial and final energies can help organize which energies need to be taken into
account.
Figure P9.50ANS
(b) Refer to Problem 50. The work-energy theorem again produces
U gi + U si = ΔEth
The spring is initially compressed a distance x and the box slides a total distance x on the
upper surface, 1.8 m down the ramp, and d on the lower surface. Inserting formulas for
the gravitational potential energy, spring potential energy, and thermal energy (Eq. 9.1,
9.25, 9.29),
1
mgy + kx 2 = Fk s
2
1
mgy + kx 2 = Fk ( x + d + 1.8 m) (1)
2
The y displacement is again found from trigonometry.
y = (1.8 m ) sin40° = 1.16 m (2)
Kinetic friction is proportional to the normal force. For the horizontal sections, this
equals the weight. For the ramp, it is smaller, which we calculate knowing that the net
force perpendicular to the surface must be zero.
Fk = µk FN = µk mg (horizontal)
Fk = µ k FN = µ k mg cos 40° (ramp)
Inserting these and equation (2) into equation (1),
1
mgy + kx 2 = ( µ k mg ) (x + d) + ( µ k mg cos 40°) (1.8 m)
2
Solving for d,
y 1 kx 2
d= + − x − (1.8 m ) ( cos 40°)
µ k 2 µ k mg
1.16 m 1 ( 345 N/m ) ( 0.30 m )

2
d= + − 0.3 m − 1.4 m = 8.6 m

0.35 2 ( 0.35) ( 0.65 kg ) 9.81 m/s 2 ( )
(c) Now the box slides on the lower horizontal surface about 1.4 m less than it did in the
previous problem.
52. (a) The spring does positive work on the block at it travels from x = 0.0350 m to x =
0:
⎡1 2 1 2 ⎤
Ws = ⎢ kxi − kx f ⎥
⎢⎣ 2 2 ⎥⎦
⎡1 2 ⎤
Ws = ⎢ (625 N/m)(0.0350 m) −0⎥ = 0.383 J
⎢⎣ 2 ⎥⎦
From the work-kinetic energy theorem (Equation 9.5),
1 2 1 2
Ws = ΔK = mv f − mvi
2 2
1 2
mv −0 = Ws
2 f
2Ws 2(0.383 J)
vf = = = 0.505 m/s
m 3.00 kg
(b) Friction does negative work on the block, so the change in kinetic energy is given by:
Ws − F f d = ΔK
1 2 1 2
Ws −µk mgd = mv f − mvi
2 2
With vi = 0 and Ws = 0.383 J from part (a),
2 ⎡⎢0.383 J −(0.280)(3.00 kg)(9.81 m/s )(0.035 m)⎤⎥

2
2(Ws −µk mgd) ⎣ ⎦ = 0.251 m/s
vf = =
m 3.00 kg
53. The initial and final kinetic energies of the box are both zero, since the box is dropped
from rest and briefly comes to rest at the point of the maximum compression of the
spring. At this point, the gravitational potential energy of the box, having dropped a total
distance of h + x, is converted to potential energy in the spring. We take the reference
configuration for gravitational potential energy at the equilibrium configuration of the
spring. Since this is a conservative system, we write this as
ΔK + ΔU = 0
K f − K i +U f −U i = 0
⎛1 2 ⎞
0−0 + ⎜⎜ kx + mg(−x)⎟⎟⎟ − mgd = 0
⎜⎝ 2 ⎟⎠
This gives a quadratic in x:

1 2
kx − mgx − mgd = 0
2
Plugging in,
240 2 2 2
x −(2.00 kg)(9.81 m/s )x −(2.00 kg)(9.81 m/s )(1.75 m) = 0
2
2
120x −19.6x −34.3= 0
19.6 ±130
x=
240
The negative root does not correspond to the setup of the problem, since x must be a
positive distance, so
x = 0.623 m
Figure P9.53ANS
54. (a) Consider the person and the Earth to be in the system. Consider the initial time the
person is in contact with the ground and the final time the person is at her maximum
altitude. So when a person jumps up, the system’s potential energy increases. If we can
ignore dissipative forces such as drag, then the increase in potential energy is due to a
decrease in the person’s internal energy. So to estimate the decrease in the person’s
internal energy, we need to estimate the increase in the system’s gravitational potential
energy. If the person weighs 130 lb (600 N) and jumps 2 feet (0.6 m) straight up,
ΔU g = mg Δy = ( 600 N )( 0.6 m ) = 400 J
So the person’s internal energy decreases by about this amount.

ΔEint ≈ −400 J
(b) Ultimately the source of energy is the food consumed by the person. In order to have
400 J to do this feat, the person would need to eat a very small amount of food. (A slice
of pizza has about 106 J or about four orders of magnitude more energy than is lost by a
single jump.)
55. We use the free-body diagram and Newton’s second law to find tension; we expect
our answer to match our answer in part (b) of Example 9.9. Write Newton’s second law
for the x components of forces, and use the fact that the tuber is not accelerating to find
FT .
∑F x = FT − Fk − Fg sin θ = 0
FT = Fk + Fg sin θ
Using Fk = µkFN,
FT = µ k mg cosθ + mg sin θ = mg ( µ k cosθ + sin θ )
FT = 415 N [(0.16) cos18° + sin18°] = 1.9 × 102 N
56. The phrase “just barely make it around the loop” means that when the car is at the top
of the loop, the normal force is zero and only gravity contributes the centripetal force at
that point. There are no dissipative forces, so we can use the conservation of mechanical
energy. We can make a bar chart of the energy for this problem. At the initial time, the
car is not moving and is at a height yi . At the final time (top of the loop), the speed is
such that gravity is just equal to the centripetal acceleration and the car is at a height of
2R.
K i + U gi = K f + U gf
1 2
0 + mgyi = mv + mg(2R) (1)
2 f
v 2f
ac = g =
R
v = gR
2
f
(2)
Plugging equation (2) into (1),

1
mgyi = mgR + 2mgR
2
5
mgyi = mgR
2
5
yi = R
2
Figure P9.56ANS
57. In Problem 56, we determined that the minimum initial height was 5R/2. Based on the
problem, we assume that all of the initial potential energy is eventually converted into
thermal energy from friction on the final, flat part of the track after the loop. An energy
bar chart would just have an initial potential energy and a final thermal energy of the
same magnitude. We can set these energies equal to each other. The thermal energy is
ΔEth = Fr s = µr FN Δx = µr mg Δx
Therefore,
U gi = ΔEth
mgyi = µr mg Δx
We find an expression for Δx and substitute values.
⎛5 ⎞
mg ⎜ R⎟ = µr mgΔx
⎝2 ⎠
5R 5(0.45 m)
Δx = = = 3.75 m
2 µr 2(0.3)
Figure P9.57ANS
58. No, the amplitude will continuously get smaller, and the pendulum will eventually
stop. The pendulum is not an isolated system. In fact, there are non-zero frictional forces,
such as drag (air resistance) and friction between the string and the ceiling mount, which
will convert mechanical energy of the pendulum into heat (thermal energy).
59. We choose our system to include the toy duck and the floor. There are several energy
terms involved in this scenario, so we need to use the work-kinetic energy theorem in the
form of Equation 9.31 to ensure we account for each energy term. The toy duck is sliding
horizontally, so gravitational potential energy does not change. A bar chart can help us
keep track of the conversion between the various forms of energy.
Ki + U i + Wtot = K f + U f + ΔEth
Ui = U f = 0
Ki = K f
Wtot = ΔEth (1)
We need expressions for both the magnitude of total work done by the outside constant
force (Eq. 9.14) and the change in thermal energy (Eq. 9.29).
 
W = F i Δr = FΔr cosθ
ΔEth = Fk Δr
We now insert these into equation 1.

FΔr cosθ = Fk Δr
(2)
F cosθ = µ k FN
Referring to the free-body diagram, the normal force is the sum of the weight of the toy
duck and the vertical component of the pulling force.
FN = mg − F sin θ
Inserting this into equation 2, we can solve for F and insert numerical values.
F cos θ = µk ( mg − F sin θ )
F=
µk mg
=
( 0.70 ) (1.25 kg ) 9.81 m/s 2
= 7.3 N
( )
cosθ + µk sin θ cos50.0° + ( 0.70 ) sin50.0°
We can check your formula by considering, for instance, pulling the toy at an angle of 0°,
in which case the pulling force would equal the force of friction to maintain a constant
velocity.
Figure P9.59aANS
Figure P9.59bANS
60. Average power is work over time (Eq. 9.34), and the work the student performs is the
energy required to supply potential energy (Eq. 9.26).
2
W mgh (75.0 kg)(9.81 m/s )(9.50 m)
P= = = = 699 W
Δt t 10.0 s
61. We need to find a numerical result. The dissipated power is found from the rate at
which thermal energy increases (Eq. 9.37). We do not have enough information to use
dE
P = th directly, but substituting ΔEth = Fk y (Eq. 9.29), we obtain an expression for
dt
the power dissipated by friction.
dEth d(Fk y) dy
P= = = Fk = Fk v = (5000 N)(16.6 m/s) = 8.3× 104 W
dt dt dt
62. We can estimate the energy required to increase your potential energy by climbing
two flights of stairs. If, for instance, we assume a mass of 85 kg and that each floor is 3 m
high, we need to supply
ΔU = mgh = (85 kg)(9.81 m/s 2 )(6 m) ≈ 5000 J
Exerting this work over a 10 second time interval, the power (Eq. 9.26) is
W 5000 J
P= = = 500 W
Δt 10 s
This is really a minimum power required assuming no friction, etc.
63. The elevator motor is doing positive mechanical work by increasing the potential
energy of the elevator with people. That work per unit time would be in an ideal case
equal to electrical power consumed. In our case, due to the thermal energy loss, the
electrical power will be twice that. Starting with Equation 9.31, we assume that the
thermal energy losses are of the same magnitude as the potential energy required to lift
the elevator. Assuming constant speed, the change in kinetic energy is zero.
Wtot = ΔU f + ΔEth
Wtot = 2ΔU f = 2mgΔy
We can calculate the power by finding the energy required per second, during which
time, the height increases by 2.5 m. The total mass for the elevator and 6 passengers is
1280 kg.
W 2mgΔy
P= =
Δt Δt
2(1280 kg)(9.81 m/s 2 )(2.5 m)
P= = 6.28×104 W
1s
64. Power can be calculated by multiplying the average velocity by the force exerted (Eq.
9.38). We calculate the average velocity and the force exerted on the pail, which must be
equal to the weight of the pail, assuming that Jill pulls the pail at constant velocity.
Δy 25.0 m
vav = = = 2.05 m/s
Δt 12.2 s
(
F = mg = ( 6.82 kg ) 9.81 m/s 2 = 66.9 N )
 
P = F i v = Fv = ( 66.9 N ) ( 2.05 m/s ) = 137 W
65. In order to find the power exerted by Boris on the crate-pulley system, we must find
the work performed by Boris. This can be found by choosing the original location of the
crate to be where y = 0, and writing a conservation of energy statement such as Eq. 9.31.
The only work performed on the system in this case is the work performed by Boris. The
initial and final kinetic energy are both zero.
( )
W = (81.36 kg ) 9.81 m/s2 ( 6.53 m) = 5.21×103 J
The average power can then be found using Eq. 9.34.
W 5.21×103 J
P= = = 978 W
Δt 5.33 s
66. Eq. 9.5 provides us a backdrop for thinking about this problem. Both vehicles begin
with no kinetic energy and reach the same final speed. However, because the mass of the
vehicles is different, the final kinetic energies, or the required work in each case, will
necessarily be different. Estimate the mass of the truck to be 2000 kg and the mass of the
car to be 1500 kg. If we convert the speed to m/s, we can use these masses to find the
final kinetic energy of each object, as well as the work required in each case (Eq. 9.5)
⎛ 1 h ⎞ ⎛ 1609 m ⎞
v f = 60 mph ⋅ ⎜ ⎟⋅⎜ ⎟ = 27 m/s
⎝ 3600 s ⎠ ⎝ 1 mile ⎠
1
( 2000 kg )( 27 m/s ) = 7.3 ×105 J
2
Wtruck = K f , truck =
2
1
(1500 kg )( 27 m/s ) = 5.5 ×105 J
2
Wcar = K f , car =
2
If we estimate the average power for the engines of the car to 170 hp and the truck to be
350 hp, then we can convert these powers to W, or J/s. Then, Eq. 9.34 can be used to find
the approximate time it would take for each vehicle to reach the final speed under these
conditions.
⎛ 745.7 W ⎞
Ptruck = 350 hp ⋅ ⎜ ⎟ = 2.6 ×10 W
5
⎝ 1 hp ⎠
⎛ 745.7 W ⎞
Pcar = 170 hp ⋅ ⎜ ⎟ = 1.3 ×10 W
5
⎝ 1 hp ⎠
Wtruck 7.3 ×105 J

Δttruck = = = 2.8 s
Ptruck 2.6 ×105 W
Wcar 5.5 ×105 J
Δtcar = = = 4.2 s
Pcar 1.3 ×105 W
Based on our estimates, the truck would win the race, though we are assuming that the
applied power is constant. This is assuredly not the case were this race exactly simulated,
but the estimate process gives us a good idea of how this might progress. It’s also not
necessarily the case that the efficiency of the two engines, transmissions, or drivetrains
are the same for the truck and car, not to mention the aerodynamics.
 
67. Using the definition for the scalar product A i B ≡ ABcosϕ , Equation 9.7, we write
 
⎛ Ai B⎞
−1
ϕ = cos ⎜
⎝ AB ⎟⎠
 
(a) A = −3iˆ − ĵ + 4 k̂ and B = 2iˆ + 2 ĵ + 2 k̂
In this case, when we calculate the dot product, we find that it’s zero.
 
A i B = (−3.00iˆ −1.00 ĵ + 4.00 k̂)⋅(2.00iˆ + 2.00 ĵ + 2.00 k̂) = −6.00− 2.00 + 8.00 = 0
Therefore, the angle must be 90 degrees, regardless of the magnitudes A and B. For
completeness though, we show the other steps in the calculation. At this point we only
know that the answer is either 90° or 270°, or put it another way, the sign (can be ± 90°).
2 2 2
A = (−3.00) + (−1.00) + (4.00) = 5.10
2 2 2
B = (2.00) + (2.00) + (2.00) = 3.46
 
−1 A× B −1 0
ϕ = cos = cos = 90°
AB (5.10)(3.46)
We follow the same method for parts (b) and (c).
 
(b) A = iˆ + 2 ĵ and B = −2 ĵ −3k̂ , so
2 2
A = (1.00) + (2.00) = 2.24
2 2
B = (−2.00) + (−3.00) = 3.61
 
A i B = (1.00iˆ + 2.00 ĵ)⋅(−2.00 ĵ −3.00 k̂) = −4.00 and
 
−1 Ai B −1 −4.00
ϕ = cos = cos = 120°
AB (2.24)(361)
 
(c) A = 4iˆ + 2 k̂ and B = −iˆ + 5 ĵ + 3k̂ , so
2 2
A = (4.00) + (2.00) = 4.47
2 2 2
B = (−1.00) + (5.00) + (3.00) = 5.92
 
A i B = (4.00iˆ + 2.00 k̂)⋅(−1.00iˆ + 5.00 ĵ + 3.00 k̂) = −4.00 + 6.00 = 2.00
and
 
−1 Ai B −1 12.00
θ = cos = cos = 86°
AB (4.47)(5.92)
68. (a) The elevator’s normal force that brings the professor from the floor of the canyon
up to the edge of tall cliff must also lift the yo-yo and perform work against gravity.
Displacement of the center of the yo-yo’s circle and force required by the elevator to lift
the yo-yo are both upwards, in the same direction, so the work must be positive.
(b) While the elevator is moving the professor’s yo-yo, Earth’s gravity is fighting against
it. The force of gravity is opposite the upward displacement so the work is negative.
(c) The string is constraining the motion of the yo-yo to that of a circle and can be
considered a centripetal force. By definition, a centripetal force is perpendicular to the
displacement, and the work done is zero.
69. (a) The work done by the force F is (Eq. 9.1)
3
WF = F f d cosθ = (200.0 N)(8.00 m)cos0° = 1.60×10 J
(b) The change in internal energy is given by (Eq. 9.29)
2
ΔEint = F f d = (25.0 kg)(9.81 m/s )(0.250)(8.00 m) = 491 J
(c) The change in kinetic energy of the crate is (Eq. 9.32)
3
ΔK = Wtot −ΔEth = 1600 J − 491 J = 1.11×10 J
1 2
(d) Using part (c), with ΔK = K f − K i and substituting Ki = 0 and K f = mv f , we
2
have
2K f 2(1110 J)
vf = = = 9.42 m/s
m 25.0 kg
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
and working a manufacture, whereas we prefer to pay, as soon as
the value and benefits of the invention made can be guessed at,
such a sum of money as will be neither, on the one hand, from its
magnitude made oppressive to the people, nor, on the other, from
insignificance or paltry conditions unworthy of a noble mind,
whatever the rank, to accept. What is given will be proportioned to
merit or service, and will be, in the fullest sense, a honorarium, a
complimentary gift, a mark of national approbation and gratitude. We
all know, though few of us think of it as a striking proof how Patents
have declined in public esteem, that among us to be a patentee is by
no means usually reckoned an honourable distinction. It is the same
in France.
“The title of patentee is falling into greater disrepute every

day from the abuse which is made of it.”
This prejudice we must remove, and we can do it. I believe in the

possibility and advisableness of presenting, as a substitute for
Patents, a system of rewards which will reconcile the honour and
interests of men of science and those of practical men, the interests
of the master and those of his workmen, the interests of the many
and those of the few. Such a system, while entirely emancipating
commerce and industry, must, as its condition, deal out its rewards
more equitably than the Patent system does, and with more regard
to the just claims of inventors. It must distribute these without the
tedious delays now suffered from. Its rewards must, in
contradistinction to present experience be sure, easily attainable,
and suitable for poor as well as rich. I respectfully submit the
following scheme as one that at least may form a basis for some
system that will obtain general acceptance.
New System of Rewarding Inventors and

Promoting the Publication of Inventions.
1. The Patent-office to be turned into an office for recording
inventions.
2. (Forms for specifications to be furnished gratuitously.)
All specifications to contain a certificate that the inventions
promise to be useful, and are believed to be new, from three persons
familiar with the trade chiefly concerned; one of whom, if the inventor
is an employé, to be his employer.
3. These specifications to be registered.
4. Any time after an invention has been tried and proved
practically useful, a fact to be duly certified, the inventor to be
allowed to claim that the invention shall be reported on.
5. A Chief Commissioner for Inventions shall appoint one or more
examiners for this purpose, whose duty it shall be (after, if needful,
first visiting the scene of operations, and conferring with practical
manufacturers) to recommend, if they think it worthy, classification
for a reward, prize, or certificate of merit.
6. Once a year the head of the Invention-office, with the help of an
Adjudicatory Committee, who shall form an Invention Commission,
shall classify the several inventions that have been in the previous
twelve months certified as having been for the first time brought into
beneficial use.
7. In his classification the first rank shall entitle to a
reward of £10,000.
2nd 5,000.
3rd 1,000.
4th 500.
5th 100.
6th 50.
7th, Gold Medal, or value in money.
8th, Silver Medal ”
9th, Bronze Medal ”
10th, Certificate of Merit.
8. Parliament shall annually place at the disposal of the Invention

Commission £200,000, from which shall be defrayed the expenses
of the staff, and fees to “reporters,” as well as of the several
publications showing the progress of Invention that shall (as now, but
on an improved system) be issued; the balance to be distributed in
rewards and prizes, with an understanding, however, that the
amount must be reduced if the total awards of the Commission shall
exceed the money at its disposal.
9. In appointing Commissioners Government shall consult the
various trading interests of the nation in order to select the most
acceptable persons. Inventors collectively might have a veto or the
initiative.
10. The prizes may be divided between the originator of the idea
of any invention and the successful introducer into practical use.
11. Where there are rival claimants, the expense of deciding
priority in respect of time and merit to be borne by themselves.
12. The Commission to be at liberty to correspond with foreign
nations, and act in concert with any that shall establish instead of
Patents a system of rewards.
13. In cases in which pre-eminent merit, especially if there has
been a course of costly experiments antecedent, appears to entitle
to a reward greater than the largest in the schedule, Government
may propose to Parliament special augmentations. I do not presume
to recommend Royal decorations and titles, though such honours
would be much valued.
A writer on Patents has judiciously said—
“It would seem very desirable that a system of registration

for all improvements or ideas which an inventor may think of
minor importance should be instituted, whereby any one
could, at a moderate cost to defray expenses, deposit at the
Patent-office, a description of any new idea, improvement, or
invention.”
My scheme is calculated to answer this good end.

Here I may fitly call attention to an interesting and instructive
analysis which Mr. Woodcroft submitted to the Commission. He
showed—
Results of the Examination of the first hundred inventions,

for which applications for Patents were made in each of
the years 1855, 1858, and 1862 (abridged).
1855.
“Of the first hundred inventions for which applications for
Patents were made in the year 1855, none are apparently of
considerable value.
“Four of the hundred inventions appear to be of some, but
not of great value, and Patents were granted for all of them.
“The remaining ninety-six of the hundred inventions seem
to be of little or no value; and Patents were granted for sixty-
six of them.”
1858.
Patents were made in the year 1858, none are apparently of
considerable value.
“Three of the hundred inventions appear to be of some, but
not of much value.
“The remaining ninety-seven of the hundred inventions
seem to be of little or no value; and Patents were granted for
sixty-two of them.”
1862.
Patents were made in the year 1862, one is apparently of
considerable value.
“Of the same hundred inventions one appeared to be of
some, but not of great value.
“The remaining ninety-eight of the hundred inventions seem
to be of little or no value. Patents were granted for fifty-nine of
them.”
I conceive, on the basis of this evidence, that the estimate I am

now about to give represents, relatively, but I will not venture to say
absolutely, a fair view of probable claims. It also affords some guide
for anticipating what, coming from the Exchequer, would be a
reasonable total vote for rewards. Such a sum, or even a larger,
Parliament should willingly grant. It can be proved to be true national
economy. The nation, as individuals, is paying vastly more now. For
that burden Parliament, by not removing Patents, is alone
responsible.
1 at £10,000
3 at 5,000 15,000
12 at 1,000 12,000
84 at 500 42,000
250 at 100 25,000
400 at 50 20,000
Medals and Certificates of Honour and Merit 1,000
750 £125,000
I am aware that inventors have hitherto drawn such large sums in

some cases (in many or most cases claiming more than they got),
that they may at first hardly be pleased with my proposal. But they
should remember that the sums set down are those derivable from
one country alone—one of the between forty or fifty countries which
give Patents now. The revenues from these other countries,
therefore, are to be added. They will also consider that it is optional
whether or not they apply for rewards. Let them work in secret, if
they will and can. But if they resolutely contend for Patents, let them
know the time for abolishing these is at hand; and abolition may
come, if they resist it, without even this substitute.
I have endeavoured to show what I believe to be true—that
Parliament, when it, by the Act 21, Jas., 3, tolerated monopolies for
inventions, did not sanction any system at all like that into which
Patents have developed, or degenerated; that, in defiance of the Act,
Patents are granted so as to create the evils which Parliament
expressly sought to shield the nation from; that recent legislation has
aggravated the great evils that pre-existed; that a Commission has
satisfied itself that no radical or sufficient remedy can be applied;
that the arguments of the defenders of Patent monopolies are
untenable; that the most eminent statesmen, lawyers, engineers,
manufacturers, and philosophers plead for abolition; that the State is
at liberty, and has the power, to devise, if it wills, a better method of
dealing with inventions, but that such a method must be one that
leaves manufacturers free, and able to compete with continental
rivals by at once adopting, without any burden of royalties, every
most recent improvement.
To conclude: this great and vital question cannot longer be
deferred. It must be taken up, and that early, by what is expected to
be a working Parliament—a Parliament, too, which for the first time
can claim to represent labour and operative industry. Parliament has
legislated in order to the preservation of salmon, and required the
removal of obstacles on the coasts and in the rivers. Here are far
worse obstacles, affecting not a luxury, but all our necessaries of
existence, and every means of earning a livelihood.
Again: are we not asked to remove light-dues at the sea and tolls
on the land? But what are these unimportant, sparse, and withal
equitable taxes, compared with the close-recurring stoppage and the
indefinite and heavy demands for questionable “service” which
Patents constitute? Yet, again: By arrangement with France we
recently abolished the time-sanctioned petty exemptions of free-
men; but here we are continuing to levy more burdensome private
taxes, with exemptions in favour of foreigners! It is they, indeed,
whom the provisions of the Patent-Law strangely serve. Foreign
countries are not so liberal to British subjects as we are to theirs;—
why should they? The number of Patents we grant in a year to
foreigners has increased within a short period tenfold—to about 880,
or about twelve times the whole number that Prussia grants to her
own subjects and all the world besides. Well may Sir William
Armstrong remark in his evidence:—
“Unless you wish to benefit the foreigner, unless that be the

sole object, as a matter of policy, I do not see what the motive
to apply the Patent system is.”
The same witness said also:—
“Is it the fact that Patents are taken out in this country for
processes which are in operation abroad, but which have not
been previously introduced into this country?—Certainly. A
process in actual operation abroad, which has not been
published in this country, can be made the subject of a
Patent.
“Is it practically the case that processes which are carried
on abroad are brought into this country by parties who patent
them here?—Yes.
“A great number every week?—Yes, constantly.”
Any one who has followed me in the statements I have presented

will see that, while we have been retrograding and making our
system of monopoly wider and worse, the Continent, to which a
Patent system was first introduced just three-quarters of a century
ago, is ahead of us in respect of the prudence with which exclusive
privileges are granted and administered. There, as a rule tolerably
general, Patents of importation are treated less liberally than those
granted to inventors. The early and almost continuous working of the
Patent within the kingdom is required; it lapses when expiry abroad
exposes to foreign competition; expropriation is provided for; there is
more scrutiny; medical appliances and food are excluded, &c.
But this is merely one, and a comparatively unimportant, fault of
the system. There are many faults, as we have seen, much more
serious, and which the Commission deem irremovable. I must,
therefore, protest against injury done by the Patent system to our
manufacturers and artisans, and through them to the nation.
These interests, the interests of us all, cannot with impunity be
subjected longer to the hardships that I have endeavoured to
expose. Times are changed. British and Irish manufacturing pre-
eminence is passing away, not indeed by its actual retrogression, but
by a simultaneous and relatively more rapid progression of rivals on
the Continent, who, in not a few cases, are competing successfully,
even in our home markets, in those articles of commerce and
manufacture in which but lately we, perhaps conceitedly, supposed
we had outstripped, without a chance of being overtaken, all
conceivable rivals. The motion, of which notice has been given, is:—
“That, in the opinion of this House, the time has arrived

when the interests of trade and commerce, and the progress
of the arts and sciences, in this country would be promoted by
the abolition of Patents for inventions.”
Unless, indeed, Government and the House prefer in the first

instance fresh inquiries through a Committee or Royal Commission,
in behalf of which course it is fair to allege the circumstance that
artisans and operatives were not represented among the witnesses
in former investigations, I submit that this motion ought to be at once
adopted. Such action on our part will commend, and, in a sense,
inaugurate, a principle which the nations of the world, who copied
our present system, will not be slow to appreciate and embrace.
Restoration of that effete system to its earlier moderate dimensions
—rectification, however thorough, of the wrongs it involves towards
inventors, will not suffice, and need not be attempted. The time has
come, not for palliatives nor remedies, but for removal out of the
way.
[2] Another illustration naively presented us, even by Mr.

Hindmarch, of the characteristic logic and boldness of the Patent
interest, which may surprise “inventors’ friends” accustomed to
rely that our system of Patents is legal and constitutional, will be
found in the Appendix.
[3] What would Adam Smith think of his commentator?
SPEECH OF SIR R. PALMER, K.B.,
M.P.
Sir Roundell Palmer, in seconding the motion, said he had long
felt convinced that this subject was one of great and growing
importance, which it would be necessary at an early period to bring
before the attention of the House. He rejoiced that it had been
undertaken by a practical man like the honourable member for Leith,
who could speak upon it, not under the influence of any of the partial
views which possibly those who looked at it from a lawyer’s point of
view might be thought by some to entertain, whether they were in
favour of or against Patents. He was glad to find that practical men
like his honourable friend had arrived at conclusions which, in their
broad principles, were substantially the same as those to which
many members of the legal profession, who had had a good deal of
opportunity of observing that matter, had in common with himself,
come. He was bound to state that he thought the time had arrived
rather for opening than for concluding the discussion of that subject;
and, therefore, he hoped he should not be thought to do anything
inconsistent with the duty he had undertaken in seconding his
honourable friend’s motion, when he said at once that, for his own
part, he was inclined to go to the root of the matter and abolish
Patents altogether, and not attempt to substitute even such a system
—although it might probably be preferable in many respects to the
present system—of rewards, as his honourable friend had
mentioned. Of course those who derived benefit—whether they were
the public or were private individuals—from the discoveries that
might be made if Patents ceased to exist, might always take into
consideration the value they received, and pay for that benefit, as he
believed the Government now did, although it was not bound by
Patents, with respect to improvements which were useful to the
public service. But that, he conceived, would be a very different thing
from an organised system of rewards at all analogous to the present
system of Patents. He might mention, in passing, a third plan, which
had found very able and authoritative advocates, and which he
should also greatly prefer to the present system, although he thought
total abolition would be better than that likewise. He referred to the
plan of putting an end to the notion that every person who invented
anything had a right to a Patent, and recurring to what, he imagined,
was originally the principle intended—namely, the giving of Patents
as a matter of grace and favour in well-selected and discriminated
cases, in the exercise of a discretion by an authority entrusted with
that discretion. But, as he had already said, he confessed that he
himself was not for half measures in that matter. He thought they had
a right, as the motion proposed, to say that at the period of progress
in the history of the arts and of trade in this country at which they had
arrived, they could do much better without these props. He called
them props because he thought they were meant to be so, but he
believed that at present they were nothing but obstructions and
hindrances to trade and the arts. Let him, in the first place, notice the
principle on which the Patent-Law was generally supported. Some
persons imagined that there was a sort of either moral or natural
right in inventors to some such protection as was given by Patents,
and the principle was sometimes expressed in this way—that a man
had a right to the fruit of his brain. Now, he held that invention and
discovery were essentially unlike Copyright. Copyright applied to a
creation: a man wrote a book; he thus brought into existence
something which had no existence in the nature of things before.
The rest of the world were not in the race with him to write that
particular book. But in the case of inventions and discoveries, the
facts with which they were concerned lay in Nature itself, and all
mankind who were engaged in pursuits which gave them an interest
in the investigation for practical purposes of the laws of Nature, had
an equal right of access to the knowledge of those laws and might
be equally in the track for obtaining it. All who were engaged in
particular arts and manufactures were actually upon the track which
led to the discovery of the useful application of those laws; and the
knowledge of them was the common stock and property of all
mankind who were equally in pursuit of it. He could not allow that the
man who was first in the race of discovery could claim for fourteen
years, or any other term, an exclusive property in a portion of the
common stock of knowledge which was accessible to all who used
the proper means of discovering it. It could not be said that on any
considerations except those of public advantage and expediency the
man who made the first discovery of a law of nature, or the right
mode of applying it had an exclusive right to apply that discovery for
a certain period. It was said, however, that Patents were useful to the
public, either as stimulating invention, or as insuring the publication
of useful discoveries; and he did not venture to say that the time
might not have been when they answered both of those purposes.
Bounties and premiums might be adapted to a rude state of the arts,
and an early stage in the progress of commerce, but when a nation
had reached so high a degree of progress in all ingenious arts and
discoveries and in trade and commerce as we had, he thought that
in this department, as well as in others, the system of bounties and
premiums was much more likely to be mischievous than useful. But
of course one could not demonstrate that point by resting merely on
an abstract proposition, and therefore he would ask the House to
look at two or three things which it seemed to him would put the
matter in a strong practical light. Patents might be divided into those
which might be popularly called meritorious, and those which were
not meritorious. The former class were certainly not one in a hundred
of the total number of Patents, and the latter class were very
numerous in every year. How, then, did the system work as regarded
meritorious Patents? He supposed it would be admitted that among
the most meritorious discoveries of recent times were the steam
engine, the electric telegraph, and the screw propeller for ships.
These cases furnished excellent illustrations of the way in which the
Patent system worked. Take the electric telegraph. According to the
evidence on the subject it was not possible, even for those who best
understood the matter, to say who was entitled to the merit of that
invention, so gradual and imperceptible was the natural growth and
progress of knowledge and discovery in reference to it. But about
400 or 500 Patents had been taken out as marking different steps in
the investigation of that subject. As to the screw propeller, he had
seen a book which represented the collected Patents of one
company as being 90 or 100; and he understood that the case was
very much the same in regard to the steam engine. They were not
dealing, in the case of the most meritorious inventions, with a true
discovery by a single inventor, but with an important branch of
practical knowledge at which many men were working at the same
time, and in regard to which each step attained indicated the next
step that was to follow, and many persons together were on the
road. Well, but if they were on the road, the public would get the
benefit of the discovery, and the question was whether, by enabling
each person on the road to stop up the road at his particular point,
they were not really retarding the progress of discovery, and
throwing difficulties in the way of even the most valuable inventions.
There was no one better acquainted with that subject than a friend of
his—a gentleman very eminent both in science and in law. He meant
Mr. Grove; and those members of the legal profession who had to
encounter Mr. Grove in a Patent case knew they had a very difficult
task indeed before them. Now, here were the words of Mr. Grove in
reference to that subject:—
“Always when a discovery has been made when the public

has reaped the fruits of it, there is no case, and never was a
case, either in the history of pure science or in the history of
practical discovery, where it is not alleged, ‘If you look at such
a book and such another book, you will find that so and so
has been done, and you will find that it has been anticipated.’
That is partly true and partly false. There are in all such cases
approximate anticipations. The difference is, that one man
gets at the points, hits the real thing which will do it, and the
reason why it will; whereas other people, although they may
have got the thing, have not acquired an accurate knowledge
which will enable them with certainty to produce it.”
That showed the House that the race was often so close that even
the man who had hit the thing might be shut out by somebody else
who did it a trifle better. Nothing could be more true than that. Would
the House allow him to quote the example of a very important
Patent, which he thought would make the matter clear, and indicate
how much they might lose by a system of that description. For a very
long time the distillation of oils from shale and coal had been a
matter of the common knowledge—aye, and of the common
practice, of mankind. Early in the present, or towards the end of the
last century, it was practised by means precisely similar in all points
to those which the present patentees used in this country. But it was
not known commercially that there was such a thing as paraffin, nor
was it known commercially how to distil it. The oil was, indeed,
obtained in a rough way, and without that nicety of discrimination
which afterwards resulted from scientific knowledge of the article
itself. All chemists knew that in order to distil these oils it was
necessary to keep the temperature as low as possible. This was the
state of knowledge when a great German chemist discovered that by
operating on wood, tar, and other substances, he could produce
paraffin in small quantities. He also said it could be got from coals in
precisely the same way as was subsequently done by patentees in
this country. But still the German chemist’s experiments were of a
scientific and not of a commercial character. He neither produced it
commercially nor did he hit upon the material from which it could be
commercially produced. The same oil could be produced from shale.
Only the other day there was discovered in Scotland a new kind of
mineral, as to which the scientific world were at variance whether it
was coal or shale. Patents had been already taken out for distilling
oil from shale, and, therefore, if the newly-discovered substance
were shale, oil could not be obtained from it without an infringement
of those Patents. But a Patent was taken out by a gentleman who
stated that his object was to use bituminous coals for the purpose of
distilling paraffin. In point of fact, he hit upon a mineral which was in
ambiguo, whether it was coal or shale, but which the authorities
ultimately pronounced to be coal. From this substance the oil could
be produced in large quantities. This gentleman took out his Patent,
notwithstanding all the previous knowledge on the subject, and
notwithstanding the fact to which the learned judge who decided the
case in one of its branches referred in the following terms:—
“There is ample evidence that the attention of practical

chemists was previously to the date of Young’s Patent
laboriously directed to discover the proper material and the
proper means of producing these articles in sufficiently large
quantities for common purposes.”
The public literally had in their hands all the necessary elements of
knowledge belonging to the subject, and yet the first person who
found that this particular coal was more bituminous than others
excluded the rest of the world from that manufacture for fourteen
years, and of course amassed a large fortune. Substantially, the test
in the courts of law was whether a man had made money and
brought the manufacture into use. If so, the courts assumed that all
previous knowledge was inadequate and useless, and the man who
was successful in the manufacture was regarded as the discoverer.
Was it not quite clear, however, that the public were so far on the
road to this discovery that it would have assuredly been found out
and enjoyed by the public at large if the path had not been
obstructed by the Patent? He would now mention another case. In
the days of our youth mills were much infested with flour flying about
in them. All the millers, both in this country and abroad, wanted to
get rid of this nuisance, and they were possessed of the scientific
principle and the mechanical means by which this desirable object
would be accomplished. They tried experiments with fans which
created a draught to draw the air from the millstones, and everything
depended on the adjustment of a plan to draw just sufficient air and
no more. People were actually on the road, and were doing the thing
in an imperfect way, but in such a way that if they had continued
after the granting of the Patent it would have made them infringers of
it. But the man who proposed to do just enough, and no more, was
held to be entitled to a Patent, whereupon all the millers in England
combined to go into litigation in order to defend themselves. Law-
suits of the most enormous and oppressive magnitude resulted
simply from the circumstance that a man had been allowed to step in
and prevent the millers from carrying on their business in the best
way. That they would have found it out was certain. That was
certainly the impression on his mind. He thought it was almost
certain that the discovery being in the direction of their necessity,
and depending on the application of a known principle and of known
mechanical means, was a discovery which could not in the course of
nature have been long delayed. Having said thus much about those
Patents which were meritorious, he would make a few remarks on
those which were not. A great number of Patents were simply
frivolous, and related to practical nothings, but still nothings affecting
trades, and standing like lions in the path to frighten tradespeople,
and to expose them to risk, litigation, and annoyance, if they
manufactured those articles which they ought to be at liberty to
manufacture. Then there were other Patents of a less frivolous
nature. They related to some little combination of a kind which really
was so plainly in the open path, that everybody ought to be at liberty
to use it. These, however, furnished the staple of the great majority
of Patents, which, though they did no practical good, operated to a
great extent in hindering subsequent inventors in effecting further
improvements, because these Patents covered almost the whole
ground of everything that could be possibly done. An inventor, unless
he paid a tax to the owners of prior useless Patents, was exposed to
litigation, and even if he were willing to pay the tax, the owners of the
prior useless Patent might refuse to grant him a licence. Thus for the
space of fourteen years these useless Patents might not only do no
good to the public, but might actually stop the road to all further
improvement during that long period. On this subject evidence had
been given by three persons of eminence—Mr. Scott Russell, Sir
William Armstrong, and Mr. Platt. These gentlemen agreed in saying
that the useless Patents to which he had just referred were a
practical nuisance, and, if so, it was obvious from their number that
they must be a very great nuisance. Mr. Scott Russell said:—
“There are a great many Patents of this kind (practically

useless, but not appearing so on the face of them) taken out
for boilers of steam-engines, and boilers of steam-engines
admit of very enormous variety of shape and proportions,
without damaging their efficiency. The consequence is, that it
is hardly possible at this moment for a man having to scheme
a boiler for a new situation or new circumstances to avoid
putting his foot in so doing into a trap which somebody has
previously set for boilers.... Nearly the whole of the Patents
for the boilers of steam-engines at this moment are of no
practical value to inventors or to the public; but they are
continually getting every man who makes a boiler into a
scrape with some patentee, because almost every
conceivable form of boiler having been previously patented,
and bit of a boiler, one cannot make any sort of boiler without
infringing some man’s patent.”
He said precisely the same thing of screws. Then Mr. Platt, a well-
known machine-maker, said:—
“I think that there is scarcely a week, certainly not a month,

that passes but what we have a notice of some kind or other
of things that we have never heard of in any way, and do not
know of in the least, that we are infringing upon them; and the
difficulty is to get at any knowledge. We may be now
infringing, and may have been infringing for years, and a
person may have been watching us all the time, and when he
thinks that we have made a sufficient number, he may come
down upon us, and there is no record. If a thing is entirely
new, there is a record by getting a description; but what I
mean by a description is this—A very large number of Patents
are now taken out for what is termed a combination of known
things for the same purpose, and the descriptions of those
Patents are generally so bad that it is impossible to tell the
parts that are actually patented. It is only when you come into
court, or after making some compromise rather than go to that
expense, that you ascertain that fact, and very likely they
themselves in many cases do not know the parts that they
have actually claimed. It appears to me that, as to that
question of combination, the granting of Patents for things to
do precisely the same work in the same machine, with the
addition, perhaps, of a chain or a couple of bolts, or the form
of the lever changed, a straight lever made into a compound
one; in matters of that kind it has become a very serious
question as to conducting a large business.”
These were examples which it would be very easy indeed to
multiply, and if the objections he had urged against the meritorious
Patents were well founded, what could be said in favour of the large
proportion of Patents which were thus simply obstructing the trade
and commerce of the country? Could any one doubt that in this
advanced era of knowledge the public would gain, on the whole, by
the abolition of the Patent-Laws? Before he left that part of the
subject he wished to mention one very pregnant fact. There was in
this country a powerful consumer—he meant the Government—
which, with respect to fire-arms, cannon, ships, and things of that
sort, would be placed in a very singular position indeed if it were
subject to the Patent-Laws. During the time he had the honour of
being a law officer of the Crown, an extensive war was, as the
House was aware, unfortunately raging, and a large number of
Patents had come under his consideration in connexion with so-
called improvements in ordnance and ships. It would be seen from
the evidence to which his honourable friend had referred that the
authorities at the War-office and the Admiralty had patentees
swarming like hornets about their ears, and that the public service
seemed, in consequence, likely to be obstructed to a very
inconvenient extent. The question was then tried whether the Crown
was bound by Patents at all, and a decision was obtained to the
effect that it was not. But while the Crown was free it should be
remembered that the people at large were subject to the law as it
stood, and if in the case of the Government the claims of patentees
were found to be monstrously inconvenient, it might not be difficult to
believe that they operated in the same way in the case of the rest of
the world also. He should not enter into the minor details of the
improvements which had been recommended by the Commission,
but there was another point to which he wished briefly to advert
before he sat down; he alluded to the question of the protection of
the public against invalid and bad Patents. The whole argument in
favour of Patents proceeded on the supposition that the public were
likely to be really benefited by some discovery which was worth the
price of all the inconvenience and obstruction to which they were
exposed under the present system. But if they said that they gained
nothing by the Patent, and that they only wanted to be set free, what
was the position in which they stood in reference to the cardinal point
of protection against bad Patents? Was there really any protection in
that respect in the duties which were discharged by the law officers
of the Crown? It was impossible for the law officers of the Crown,
acting on the mere statement of the patentee, to know with certainty
whether a so-called discovery was new or not. They could only
examine into the question whether an alleged invention, as
described on the face of it, was or was not satisfactory, but they
could in no way protect the public against having an old thing put
forward as a new, or a useless as a useful invention. Indeed, the
attempt by means of any sort of preliminary investigation to establish
the utility or inutility of a Patent must, in his opinion, necessarily fail
so long as the granting of Patents was a matter of right and not of
discretion. And what was the result when a Patent came to be
disputed in a court of law? Everybody was aware that such litigation
had acquired a reputation infamous beyond every other. In the
Paraffin Oil Company’s case, which had been referred to, the time
occupied before Vice-Chancellor Stuart was not less than thirty
whole days. Why was so large an amount of time consumed in those
cases? Because it was necessary to enter into the whole history of
the discovery in all its numerous stages, and to beat up witnesses all
over the country, so that a voluminous mass of scientific evidence
had to be produced. That was the reason why the expense in those
cases was so enormous, while the public were in every point of view
placed at an immense disadvantage, for the presumption was in
favour of the patentee, who, if he happened to have succeeded in an
action against another person, was entitled to have the fact put in
evidence in the case, and might subject his opponent to extra costs.
But that was not all. In a case, he believed, of a Patent for the
purifying of gas by the use of metallic oxide of iron, it came out that
there were two kinds of oxide, the hydrous and the anhydrous, and
that the one would effect the object while the other would not; but,
because the terms were general, although everybody who tried the
experiment might arrive at the result desired, the Patent was held to
be bad, and another person who took out a Patent for the hydrate
had his Patent made good. Lord Westbury, who was as well
acquainted with the subject as anybody who had in recent times
occupied the woolsack, said in 1862, in speaking on that point:—
“To vitiate a Patent by prior publication, whether in a prior

specification or in a published book, &c., the antecedent
statement must be such that a person of ordinary knowledge
of the subject would at once perceive, understand, and be
able practically to apply the discovery without the necessity of
making further experiments. If anything remains to be
ascertained which is necessary for the useful application of
the discovery, that affords sufficient room for another valid
Patent.”
It would be seen, he thought, from what he had stated, that the

public were placed at a great disadvantage in the contest. In dealing
with Patent cases in a court of law there was generally a vast array
of witnesses to be examined, consisting of mechanics, chemists, and
scientific men of all sorts on one side and the other. Then there were
the jury, who knew nothing of the subject, and the judge, who might
be placed in a worse position, because he might imagine he
understood all about it when he did not. He did not, of course, mean
to say that the judge did not sometimes understand it, but it might
very easily happen that an ingenious professional witness might so
argue the case under the form of giving evidence as to lead the
judge to think that he really knew all about it when such was not in
reality the fact. Then the bias being in favour of the patentee, the
result of such trials almost invariably was, that if the matter
happened to be of any practical importance, the public were
defeated, after having endeavoured to protect themselves at an
enormous expense. He would not enter into minute details, but
probably he had said enough to show that a great practical evil arose
out of Patent-Laws, and that for this evil there was little or no
corresponding benefit. He did not think that we should lose really
valuable discoveries if the Patent-Laws were abolished. There might
be some rare instances in which particular circumstances might give
to particular inventors motives for suppressing and facilities for

Physics For Scientists and Engineers Foundations and Connections Extended Version With Modern 1St Edition Katz Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Physics For Scientists and Engineers Foundations and Connections Extended Version With Modern 1St Edition Katz Solutions Manual Full Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Physics for Scientists and Engineers

Foundations and Connections

FD = mg ≈ (100 kg)(9.81 m/s 2 ) ≈1000 N

W = Fy Δy ≈ (1000 N)(−1000 m) ≈ −106 J

W = ( 615 N ) ( 30.0 m ) cos ( 30.0°) = 1.60 × 104 J

Fg = mg = (65.0 kg)(9.81 m/s2 )

WT = FT Δr cos θ = FT Δr cos 0° = FT Δr = (1.15)( 638 N ) (12.0 m) = +8.80 ×103 N ⋅ m

Wtot = Wg + Wh = −7.65 × 103 N ⋅ m + 8.80 × 103 N ⋅ m = 1.15 × 103 N ⋅ m

The initial velocity (and kinetic) energy are zero.

Wtot = ΔK = K f − 0 = 1.15 × 103 N ⋅ m

A trigonometric identity (Appendix A) enables us to expand the cosine term.

Use Figure 9.7 to identify the scalar components.

16. In each case we apply Equation 9.8, D = AB cos ϕ .

Case 1: The angle is 26.5°. D = ( 6.00 ) ( 3.00 ) cos 26.5° = 16.1

Case 2: The angle is 26.5° + 90°. D = ( 6.00 ) ( 3.00 ) cos116.5° = −8.03

We can now calculate the work,

W = Fg Δr = ( −12.8 N ) ( −0.62 m ) = 7.9 J

W = Fx Δx + Fy Δy = ( −3.31 N )( −2.4 m ) + ( −12.4 N )( 0 ) = 7.9 J

The work is the same in each case, as we should expect.

In the last step, we used Eq. 3.11, A = Ax2 + Ay2 + Az2 .

In the last step, we use the fact that multiplication is commutative.

Comparing equations 1 and 2, we have found the desired result.

A = Ax2 + Ay2 = 2.02 + 5.02 = 29 = 5.4

B = Bx2 + By2 = (−4.0)2 + (−3.0)2 = 5.0

Using, Eq. 9.8,

D = ABcosθ = 5.0 29 cos149° = −23

Ax = 2.0 and Ay = 5.0

D = Ax Bx + Ay By = (2.0)(−4.0) + (5.0)(−3.0) = −23

Fx = F cosθ = ( 4.75 N ) cos60°

Reading off the components of the displacement vector:

Δx = 4.2, Δy = −2.1, Δz = 1.6

Now, determine the speeds at the initial and final times.

vi = 5.0 + 4.0(2.0 s) = 13 m/s

Finally, use the work-energy theorem.

Wa = (15.0 N ) (5.00 m ) = 75.0 J

(a) ΔKa = Wa = 75.0 J

(b) ΔKb = Wb = −75.0 J

-50 -40 -30 -20 -10

W= ∫ F dx = ∫ ( −kx ) dx = − (345 N/m ) ∫

Now, express the integral that we need to evaluate.

x=7; y=0 x=7; y=4

Performing the dot products, we get

x=7; y=0 x=7; y=4

x=7; y=4 x=7; y=4

x=0; y=4 x=7; y=4

Performing the dot product, we get:

x=0; y=4 x=7; y=4

Insert the value of the tangent and solve the integrals.

Substituting equations (1) and (4) into (3),

The total force is the sum of these contributions.

Finally, substituting (5) into (2) and integrating,

We can check this in two limiting cases. If there is no displacement ( x f = 0 ), we find no

For paths A and C, the gravitational force is antiparallel/parallel to the displacement

Finally, calculating the work,

∑F x = Fg sin θ − Fk = 0 → Fk = Fg sin θ (1)

Divide equation (3) by equation (2) and solve for θ.

(c) The increase in thermal energy comes from Equation 9.29.

Now, solve for the final speed.

U i = mgy = (750.0 kg)(9.81 m/s 2 )(80.7 m) = 5.94 × 105 J

ΔEth = Ki = 5.94 ×105 J

ΔEth = Fk s = 5.94 ×105 J

µk mg (230.66 m) = 5.94 ×105 J