Against intellectual monopoly 1st Edition Michele

Boldrin - Downloadable PDF 2025

https://ebookfinal.com/download/against-intellectual-monopoly-1st-
edition-michele-boldrin/

Visit ebookfinal.com today to download the complete set of

ebooks or textbooks
Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

Surviving Stalking 1st Edition Michele Pathé

https://ebookfinal.com/download/surviving-stalking-1st-edition-
michele-pathe/

Uvod u bioetiku Michele Aramini

https://ebookfinal.com/download/uvod-u-bioetiku-michele-aramini/

Handbook of Couples Therapy 1st Edition Michele Harway

https://ebookfinal.com/download/handbook-of-couples-therapy-1st-
edition-michele-harway/

Everything Is Alive 1st Edition Michele Oka Doner

https://ebookfinal.com/download/everything-is-alive-1st-edition-
michele-oka-doner/
Anti Monopoly Law and Practice in China 1st Edition H.
Stephen Harris

https://ebookfinal.com/download/anti-monopoly-law-and-practice-in-
china-1st-edition-h-stephen-harris/

Parkinson s Disease For Dummies 1st Edition Michele

Tagliati

https://ebookfinal.com/download/parkinson-s-disease-for-dummies-1st-
edition-michele-tagliati/

Rock Art of the Caribbean 1st Edition Edition Michele

Hayward

https://ebookfinal.com/download/rock-art-of-the-caribbean-1st-edition-
edition-michele-hayward/

The Lady Flees Her Lord Michele Ann Young

https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-lady-flees-her-lord-michele-ann-
young/

Don t Give Me That Attitude 1st Edition Michele Borba

Ed.D.

https://ebookfinal.com/download/don-t-give-me-that-attitude-1st-
edition-michele-borba-ed-d/
Against intellectual monopoly 1st Edition Michele Boldrin
Digital Instant Download
Author(s): Michele Boldrin, David K. Levine
ISBN(s): 9780521879286, 0521879280
Edition: 1
File Details: PDF, 4.08 MB
Year: 2008
Language: english
This page intentionally left blank
P1: PDX head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-FM cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 May 21, 2008 19:26

AGAINST INTELLECTUAL MONOPOLY

“Intellectual property” – patents and copyrights – has become controversial.

We witness teenagers being sued for “pirating” music, and we observe AIDS
patients in Africa dying because of their lack of ability to pay for drugs that are
expensively priced by patent holders. Are patents and copyrights essential to
thriving creation and innovation? Do we need them so that we all may enjoy fine
music and good health? Across time and space the resounding answer is: No.
So-called intellectual property is in fact an “intellectual monopoly” that hinders
rather than helps the competitive free market regime that has delivered wealth
and innovation to our doorsteps. This book broadly covers both copyrights
and patents and is designed for a general audience, with its focus on everyday
examples. The authors conclude that the only sensible policy to follow is to
eliminate the patent and copyright systems as they currently exist.

Michele Boldrin is Joseph G. Hoyt Distinguished Professor of Economics in

Arts and Sciences at Washington University in St. Louis. He is a Fellow of the
Econometric Society and a Research Fellow at the Center for Economic Pol-
icy Research (London) and at Fundación de Estudios de Economı́a Aplicada
(Madrid). He is an associate editor of Econometrica, an editor of Review of
Economic Dynamics, and an advisory editor of Macroeconomic Dynamics, pub-
lished by Cambridge University Press. His research interests include growth,
innovation, and business cycles; intergenerational and demographic issues;
public policy; institutions; and social norms. He is the coauthor or coeditor of
four books and has published in leading journals such as American Economic
Review, Econometrica, Review of Economic Studies, Journal of Political Economy,
Journal of Economic Theory, Review of Economic Dynamics, Journal of Monetary
Economics, and Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control.

David K. Levine is John H. Biggs Distinguished Professor of Economics in Arts

and Sciences at Washington University in St. Louis. He is a coeditor of Econo-
metrica and NAJ Economics, president of the Society for Economic Dynamics,
a Fellow of the Econometric Society, and a research associate of the National
Bureau for Economic Research. Author with Drew Fudenberg of Learning in
Games and editor of several conference volumes, his research interests include
the study of intellectual property and endogenous growth in dynamic general
equilibrium models; the endogenous formation of preferences, institutions, and
social norms; and the application of game theory to experimental economics.
Levine has published in leading journals such as American Economic Review,
Econometrica, Review of Economic Studies, Journal of Political Economy, Jour-
nal of Economic Theory, Quarterly Journal of Economics, and American Political
Science Review.

i
P1: PDX head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-FM cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 May 21, 2008 19:26

ii
P1: PDX head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-FM cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 May 21, 2008 19:26

Against Intellectual Monopoly

MICHELE BOLDRIN
Washington University in St. Louis

DAVID K. LEVINE
Washington University in St. Louis

iii
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo

Cambridge University Press

The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK
Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York
www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521879286

© Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine 2008

This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provision of

relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place
without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published in print format 2008

ISBN-13 978-0-511-41409-1 eBook (EBL)

ISBN-13 978-0-521-87928-6 hardback

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of urls
for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not
guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
P1: PDX head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-FM cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 May 21, 2008 19:26

Contents

Acknowledgments page vii

1. Introduction 1
2. Creation under Competition 15
3. Innovation under Competition 42
4. The Evil of Intellectual Monopoly 68
5. The Devil in Disney 97
6. How Competition Works 123
7. Defenses of Intellectual Monopoly 149
8. Does Intellectual Monopoly Increase Innovation? 184
9. The Pharmaceutical Industry 212
10. The Bad, the Good, and the Ugly 243

References 271
Index 287

v
P1: PDX head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-FM cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 May 21, 2008 19:26

vi
P1: PDX head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-FM cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 May 21, 2008 19:26

Acknowledgments

Above all we are grateful to our families, Emanuela and Niccolò, Joyce, and
Milena, for putting up with us while we wrote this – not to speak of reading
and criticizing parts of it.
A great many people contributed to our ideas and knowledge of “intel-
lectual property” expressed in this book – though many of them no doubt
would disagree with our sentiments and some of our conclusions. We are
particularly grateful to Nicholas Gruen, Doug Clement, Jim Schmitz, Tim
Sullivan, and Scott Parris for their continued support and advice. Toward
Scott Parris, our editor at Cambridge University Press, we have accumulated
a particularly large debt for his infinite patience, careful reading of an end-
less sequence of versions, and very professional handling of our repeated
mishaps.
Many people advised us about particular issues. We are grateful for Pres-
ton McAfee’s analysis of the Rambus case; Alessandro Nuvolari’s advice,
especially about steam power; Ivan P’ng’s example of the wheeled suit-
case; Eric Rasumussen’s analysis of marketing and copyright; Jean-Laurent
Rosenthal’s leads on the history of copyright; and George Selgin and John
Turner’s corrections to our story of James Watt.
Many people contributed examples, comments, and references, especially
Serguey Braguinski, Tim Erickson, Jack Hirshleifer, Bronwyn Hall, Andrea
Moro, G. Moschini, Ed Prescott, Paul Seabright, Malik Shukayev, Robert
Solow, William Stepp, Stefano Trento, and Edward Welbourne.
We learned an immense amount from our fellow bloggers at http://
www.againstmonopoly.org: John Bennett, Andrea Moro, Michael Perelman,
Sheldon Richman, and William Stepp.
We are grateful also to the Slashdot Web site (http://slashdot.org) and its
many contributors for a set of detailed comments on an early version of some
of the chapters. Many other people contributed thoughts, ideas, examples,
vii
P1: PDX head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-FM cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 May 21, 2008 19:26

viii Acknowledgments

and discussion: Larry Ausubel, David Backus, Kyle Bagwell, Sandip Baliga,
Gary Becker, Robert Becker, James Bessen, William Brock, Andres Bucio,
Jorge Capapey, V. V. Chari, Pierre-Andre Chiappori, Eddie Dekel, Drew
Fudenberg, John Gallup, Richard Gilbert, Mike Golosov, Clara Graziano,
Dan Hite, Hugo Hopenhayn, Chad Jones, Larry E. Jones, Boyan Jovanovic,
Nobu Kiyotaki, Lennart Krantz, Timothy Lee, Jay Lepreau, Bob Lucas, Mike
Masnick, Salvatore Modica, Enrico Moretti, Roger Myerson, Paul Romer,
Mark Sattherwaite, Rob Shimer, Nancy Stokey, Juan Urrutia Elejalde, Ivan
Werning, Freddy Williams, Asher Wolinsky, Curtis Yarvin, and Alejandro
Zentn. Our student and research assistant, Fanchang Huang, read the whole
manuscript and corrected an endless list of typos, poorly assembled refer-
ences, and other kinds of errors. He did a great job and we are most grateful
to him. We are likewise grateful to Tenea Johnson, who copyedited the
manuscript. We are sure some errors can still be found, and it is all our
fault.
Earlier in the project, Chinese University of Hong Kong and the Univer-
sity of Pennsylvania IER/Laurence Klein Lecture provided opportunities to
present our work to broad audiences, and for this and the many comments
that resulted we are grateful.
A great many attendees at conferences and seminars listened patiently
to variations on our analysis: the economic departments of Arizona State
University, Beijing University, European University Institute, Florence, New
York University, Oxford University, Purdue University, SUNY Buffalo, Uni-
versity of California, Los Angeles, Universidad Autónoma, Madrid, Venice
International University, University of Wisconsin–Madison, and Wuhan
University; theory and/or macroeconomics workshops at Brown University,
Carlos III, City University of Hong Kong, Columbia University, Cornell
University, Harvard University, Humboldt University of Berlin, Indiana
University, Iowa State University, London School of Economics, North-
western University, Rochester University, Stanford University, Universitat
Pompeu Fabra, University of Toulouse, University of Alabama, University
of California, Berkeley, University of Chicago, and University of Kansas;
and conferences and seminars including American Economic Association
meetings in Atlanta, Carnegie Rochester Conference, Federal Reserve Bank
of Dallas conference on globalization, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond,
Fundación Urrutia Elejalde Conference, Madrid, Innocenzo Gasparini Insti-
tute for Economic Research, Milan, Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de
México, Mexico City, Loyola University, Chicago, Rochester University Weg-
mans Conference, Society for Economic Dynamics Conference, Paris, World
Bank–Pompeu Fabra conference, and Yale University’s Cowles Commission.
P1: KNP head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-01 cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 April 29, 2008 17:24

ONE

Introduction

In late 1764, while repairing a small Newcomen steam engine, the idea of
allowing steam to expand and condense in separate containers sprang into
the mind of James Watt. He spent the next few months in unceasing labor
building a model of the new engine. In 1768, after a series of improvements
and substantial borrowing, he applied for a patent on the idea, which
required him to travel to London in August. He spent the next six months
working hard to obtain his patent. It was finally awarded in January of
the following year. Nothing much happened by way of production until
1775. Then, with a major effort supported by his business partner, the rich
industrialist Matthew Boulton, Watt secured an act of Parliament extending
his patent until the year 1800. The great statesman Edmund Burke spoke
eloquently in Parliament in the name of economic freedom and against the
creation of unnecessary monopoly – but to no avail.1 The connections of
Watt’s partner Boulton were too solid to be defeated by simple principle.
Once Watt’s patents were secured and production started, he devoted a
substantial portion of his energy to fending off rival inventors. In 1782, Watt
secured an additional patent, made “necessary in consequence of . . . having
been so unfairly anticipated, by [Matthew] Wasborough in the crank
motion.”2 More dramatically, in the 1790s, when the superior Hornblower
engine was put into production, Boulton and Watt went after Jonathan
Hornblower with the full force of the legal system.3
During the period of Watt’s patents, the United Kingdom added about
750 horsepower of steam engines per year. In the thirty years following
Watt’s patents, additional horsepower was added at a rate of more than
4,000 per year. Moreover, the fuel efficiency of steam engines changed little
during the period of Watt’s patent; however between 1810 and 1835 it is
estimated to have increased by a factor of five.4

1
P1: KNP head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-01 cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 April 29, 2008 17:24

2 Against Intellectual Monopoly

After the expiration of Watt’s patents, not only was there an explosion in
the production and efficiency of engines, but also steam power came into
its own as the driving force of the Industrial Revolution. Over a thirty-year
period, steam engines were modified and improved as crucial innovations
such as the steam train, the steamboat, and the steam jenny came into wide
usage. The key innovation was the high-pressure steam engine – devel-
opment of which had been blocked by Watt’s strategic use of his patent.
Many new improvements to the steam engine, such as those of William Bull,
Richard Trevithick, and Arthur Woolf, became available by 1804: although
they had been developed earlier, these innovations were kept idle until the
Boulton and Watt patent expired. None of these innovators wished to incur
the same fate as Hornblower.5
Ironically, Watt not only used the patent system as a legal cudgel with
which to smash competition, but the very same patent system he used to
keep competitors at bay hindered his own efforts to develop a superior steam
engine. An important limitation of the original Newcomen engine was its
inability to deliver a steady rotary motion. The most convenient solution,
involving the combined use of the crank and a flywheel, relied on a method
patented by James Pickard, which prevented Watt from using it. Watt also
made various attempts to efficiently transform reciprocating motion into
rotary motion, reaching, apparently, the same solution as Pickard. But the
existence of a patent forced him to contrive an alternative, less efficient
mechanical device, the “sun and planet” gear. It was only in 1794, after the
expiration of Pickard’s patent, that Boulton and Watt adopted the econom-
ically and technically superior crank.6
The impact of the expiration of his patents on Watt’s empire may come
as a surprise. As might be expected, when the patents expired “many estab-
lishments for making steam-engines of Mr. Watt’s principle were then com-
menced.” However, Watt’s competitors “principally aimed at . . . cheapness
rather than excellence.” As a result, we find that, far from being driven out of
business, “Boulton and Watt for many years afterwards kept up their price
and had increased orders.”7
In fact, it is only after their patents expired that Boulton and Watt really
started to manufacture steam engines. Before then, their activity consisted
primarily of extracting hefty monopolistic royalties through licensing. Inde-
pendent contractors produced most of the parts, and Boulton and Watt
merely oversaw the assembly of the components by the purchasers.
In most histories, James Watt is a heroic inventor, responsible for the
beginning of the Industrial Revolution. The facts suggest an alternative
interpretation. Watt is one of many clever inventors who worked to improve
P1: KNP head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-01 cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 April 29, 2008 17:24

Introduction 3

steam power in the second half of the eighteenth century. After getting one
step ahead of the pack, he remained ahead not by superior innovation but
also by superior exploitation of the legal system. The fact that his business
partner was a wealthy man with strong connections in Parliament was not
a minor help.
Was Watt’s patent a crucial incentive needed to trigger his inventive
genius, as the traditional history suggests? Or did his use of the legal system
to inhibit competition set back the Industrial Revolution by a decade or
two? More broadly, are the two essential components of our current system
of “intellectual property” – patents and copyrights – with all of their many
faults, a necessary evil we must put up with to enjoy the fruits of invention
and creativity? Or are they just unnecessary evils, the relics of an earlier
time when governments routinely granted monopolies to favored courtiers?
Those are the questions we seek to answer.
In the specific case of Watt, the granting of the 1769 and especially of
the 1775 patents likely delayed the mass adoption of the steam engine:
innovation was stifled until his patents expired, and few steam engines were
built during the period of Watt’s legal monopoly. From the number of
innovations that occurred immediately after the expiration of the patent, it
appears that Watt’s competitors simply waited until then before releasing
their own innovations. This should not surprise us: new steam engines,
no matter how much better than Watt’s, had to use the idea of a separate
condenser. Because the 1775 patent provided Boulton and Watt with a
monopoly over that idea, plentiful other improvements of great social and
economic value could not be implemented. By the same token, until 1794,
Boulton and Watt’s engines were less efficient than they could have been
because Pickard’s patent prevented anyone else from using, and improving
on, the idea of combining a crank with a flywheel.
Also, we see that Watt’s inventive skills were badly allocated: we find him
spending more time engaged in legal action to establish and preserve his
monopoly than in the actual improvement and production of his engine.
From a strictly economic point of view, Watt did not need such a long-
lasting patent; it is estimated that by 1783 – seventeen years before his
patent expired – his enterprise had already broken even. Indeed, even after
their patent expired, Boulton and Watt were able to maintain a substantial
premium over the market by virtue of having been first, despite the fact that
their competitors had had thirty years to learn how to make steam engines.
The wasteful effort to suppress competition and obtain special privileges
is referred to by economists as rent-seeking behavior. History and common
sense show it to be a poisoned fruit of legal monopoly. Watt’s attempt to
P1: KNP head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-01 cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 April 29, 2008 17:24

4 Against Intellectual Monopoly

extend the duration of his 1769 patent is an especially egregious example

of rent seeking: the patent extension was clearly unnecessary to provide
incentive for the original invention, which had already taken place. On top
of this, we see Watt using patents as a tool to suppress innovation by his
competitors, such as Hornblower, Wasborough, and others.
Hornblower’s engine is a perfect case in point: it was a substantial
improvement over Watt’s, as it introduced the new concept of the com-
pound engine with more than one cylinder. This, and not the Boulton and
Watt design, was the basis for further steam engine development after their
patents expired. However, because Hornblower built on the earlier work of
Watt, making use of his separate condenser, Boulton and Watt were able to
block him in court and effectively put an end to steam engine development.
The monopoly over the separate condenser, a useful innovation, blocked the
development of another equally useful innovation, the compound engine,
thereby retarding economic growth. This retardation of innovation is a clas-
sic case of what we shall refer to as intellectual property inefficiency (or IP
inefficiency).
Finally, there is the slow rate at which the steam engine was adopted
before the expiration of Watt’s patent. By keeping prices high and preventing
others from producing cheaper or better steam engines, Boulton and Watt
hampered capital accumulation and slowed economic growth.
The story of James Watt is a damaging case for the benefits of a patent
system, but we shall see that it is not an unusual story. New ideas accrue
almost by chance to innovators while they are carrying out a routine activity
aimed at a completely different end. The patent comes many years after
that, and it results more from a mixture of legal acumen and abundant re-
sources available to “oil the gears of fortune” than anything else. Finally,
after the patent protection is obtained, it is primarily used as a tool to
prevent economic progress and to hurt competitors.
Although this view of Watt’s role in the Industrial Revolution may appear
iconoclastic, it is neither new nor particularly original. Frederic Scherer, a
prestigious academic supporter of the patent system, after going through
the details of the Boulton and Watt story, concluded his 1965 examination
of their story with the following illuminating words:

Had there been no patent protection at all, . . . Boulton and Watt certainly would
have been forced to follow a business policy quite different from that which they
actually followed. Most of the firm’s profits were derived from royalties on the use of
engines rather than from the sale of manufactured engine components, and without
patent protection the firm plainly could not have collected royalties. The alternative
would have been to emphasize manufacturing and service activities as the principal
P1: KNP head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-01 cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 April 29, 2008 17:24

Introduction 5

source of profits, which in fact was the policy adopted when the expiration date of
the patent for the separate condenser drew near in the late 1790s. . . . It is possible
to conclude more definitely that the patent litigation activities of Boulton & Watt
during the 1790s did not directly incite further technological progress. . . . Boulton
and Watt’s refusal to issue licenses allowing other engine makers to employ the
separate-condenser principle clearly retarded the development and introduction of
improvements.8

∗∗∗
The Industrial Revolution was long ago. But the issue of “intellectual prop-
erty” is a contemporary one. At the time we wrote this, U.S. District Judge
James Spencer had been threatening for three years to shut down the widely
used Blackberry messaging network – over a patent dispute.9 And Black-
berry itself is not without sin: in 2001 Blackberry sued Glenayre Electronics
for infringing on its patent for “pushing information from a host system to
a mobile data communication device.”10
A similar war is taking place over copyright – the Napster network was
shut down by a federal judge in July 2000 in a dispute over the sharing of
copyrighted files.11 Emotions run high on both sides. Some civil libertarians
promote the anticopyright slogan “information just wants to be free.” On
the other extreme, large music and software companies argue that a world
without “intellectual” property would be a world without new ideas.
Some of the bitterness of the copyright debate is reflected in Stephen
Manes’s attack on Larry Lessig:
According to Stanford law professor and media darling Lawrence Lessig, a “move-
ment must begin in the streets” to fight a corrupt Congress, overconcentrated media
and an overpriced legal system. . . . Contrary to Lessig’s rants . . . “Fair use” excep-
tions in existing copyright law . . . are so expansive that just about the only thing
cut-and-pasters clearly can’t do legally with a copyrighted work is directly copy a
sizable portion of it.12
Certainly Lessig is no friend of current copyright law. Yet, despite Stephen
Manes’s assertions to the contrary, he does believe in balancing the rights of
producers with the rights of users: his book Free Culture speaks repeatedly
of this balance and how it has been lost in modern law.13
Like Lessig, many economists are skeptical of current law – seventeen
prominent economists, including several Nobel Prize winners, filed a brief
with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of Lessig’s lawsuit challenging the
extension of the length of copyright. Also like Lessig, economists recog-
nize a role for “intellectual property”: where lawyers speak of balancing
rights, economists speak of incentives. To quote from a textbook by the two
prominent economists Robert Barro and Xavier Sala-i-Martin: “It would
P1: KNP head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-01 cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 April 29, 2008 17:24

6 Against Intellectual Monopoly

be [good] to make the existing discoveries freely available to all producers,

but this practice fails to provide the . . . incentives for further inventions.
A tradeoff arises between restrictions on the use of existing ideas and the
rewards to inventive activity.”14 Indeed, while many of us enjoy the benefits
of being able to freely download music from the Internet, we worry as well
how musicians are to make a living if their music is immediately given away
for free.
Although a furious debate rages over copyrights and patents, there is
general agreement that some protection is needed to secure for inventors
and creators the fruits of their labors. The rhetoric that “information just
wants to be free” suggests that no one should be allowed to profit from his
or her ideas. Despite this, there does not seem to be a strong lobby arguing
that, though it is OK for the rest of us to benefit from the fruits of our labors,
inventors and creators should have to subsist on the charity of others.
For all the emotion, it seems both sides agree that “intellectual property”
laws need to strike a balance between providing sufficient incentive for
creation and the freedom to make use of existing ideas. Put differently,
both sides agree that “intellectual property” rights are a “necessary evil”
that fosters innovation, and disagreement is over where the line should
be drawn. For the supporters of “intellectual property,” current monopoly
profits are barely enough; for its enemies, currently monopoly profits are
too high.
Our analysis leads to conclusions that are at variance with both sides. Our
reasoning proceeds along the following lines. Everyone wants a monopoly.
No one wants to compete against their own customers, or against imita-
tors. Currently patents and copyrights grant producers of certain ideas a
monopoly. Certainly, few people do something in exchange for nothing.
Creators of new goods are not different from producers of old ones: they
want to be compensated for their effort. However, it is a long and dangerous
jump from the assertion that innovators deserve compensation for their
efforts to the conclusion that patents and copyrights, that is, monopoly, are
the best or the only way to provide that reward. Statements such as, “A patent
is the way of rewarding somebody for coming up with a worthy commercial
idea”15 abound in the business, legal, and economic press. As we shall see,
there are many other ways in which innovators are rewarded, even substan-
tially, and most of them are better for society than the monopoly power
that patents and copyright currently bestow. Because innovators may be
rewarded even without patents and copyright, we should ask, Is it true that
“intellectual property” achieves the intended purpose of creating incentives
for innovation and creation that offset its considerable harm?
P1: KNP head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-01 cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 April 29, 2008 17:24

Introduction 7

This book examines both the evidence and the theory. Our conclusion is
that creators’ property rights can be well protected in the absence of “intel-
lectual property,” and that the latter does not increase either innovation or
creation. They are an unnecessary evil.
∗∗∗
This is a book about economics, not about law. Or, put differently, it is not
about what the law is but rather what the law should be. If you are interested
in whether you are likely to wind up in jail for sharing your files over the
Internet, this is not the book for you. If you are interested in whether it
is a good idea for the law to prevent you from sharing your files over the
Internet, then this book is for you.
However, although this book is not about the law, some background
on the law is necessary to understand the economic issues. We are going
to examine the economics of what has, in recent years, come to be called
“intellectual property,” especially patents and copyright. In fact, there are
three broad types of “intellectual property” recognized in most legal systems:
patents, copyrights, and trademarks.
Trademarks are different in nature from patents and copyrights: they
serve to identify the providers of goods, services, or ideas. Copying, which
would be a violation of copyright, is quite different from lying, which would
be a violation of trademark. We do not know of a good reason for allowing
market participants to steal identities or to masquerade as people they are
not. Conversely, there are strong economic advantages in allowing market
participants to voluntarily identify themselves. Although we may wonder
whether it is necessary to allow the Intel Corporation a monopoly over the
use of the word inside, in general there is little economic dispute over the
merits of trademarks.
Patents and copyrights, the two forms of “intellectual property” on which
we focus, are a subject of debate and controversy. They differ from each other
in the extent of coverage they provide. Patents apply to specific implemen-
tations of ideas – though in recent years in the United States there has been
decreasing emphasis on specificity. Patents do not last forever: in the United
States, patents covering techniques of manufacture last twenty years, and
fourteen years for ornamentation. Patents provide relatively broad protec-
tion: no one can legally use the same idea, even if he or she independently
rediscovers it, without permission from the patent holder.16
Copyrights are narrower in scope, protecting only the specific details of
a particular narrative – though as with the case of patents, the scope has
been increasing in recent years. Copyright is also much longer in duration
P1: KNP head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-01 cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 April 29, 2008 17:24

8 Against Intellectual Monopoly

than patents – the life of the author plus fifty years for the many signatory
countries of the Berne Convention, and – in the United States since the
Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act – the life of the author plus
seventy years.17
In the United States, there are limitations on copyright not present in
patent law. As Stephen Manes correctly points out in his attack on Larry
Lessig, the right of fair use allows the purchaser of a copyrighted item limited
rights to employ it, make partial copies of it, and resell them, regardless of
the desires of the copyright holder. In addition, certain derivative works
are allowed without permission: parodies are allowed, for example, while
sequels are not.
In the case of both patents and copyright, from the point of view of
economics, there are two ingredients in the law: the right to buy and sell
copies of ideas, and the right to control how other people make use of their
copies. The first right is not controversial. In copyright law, when applied
to the creator, this right is sometimes called the right of first sale. However,
it extends also to the legitimate rights of others to sell their copies. It is
the second right, enabling the owner to control the use of “intellectual
property” after sale, that is controversial. This right produces a monopoly –
enforced by the obligation of the government to act against individuals or
organizations that use the idea in ways prohibited by the copyright or patent
holder.
In addition to the well-known forms of “intellectual property” – patents
and copyright – there are also lesser-known ways of protecting ideas. These
include contractual agreements, such as the shrink-wrapped and click-
through agreements that you never read when you buy software. They also
include the most traditional form of protection – trade secrecy – as well as
its contractual and legal manifestations, such as nondisclosure agreements.
Like patents and copyright, all of these devices serve to help the originator
of an idea maintain a monopoly over it.
We do not know of any legitimate argument that producers of ideas should
not be able to profit from their creations. Although ideas could be sold in
the absence of a legal right, markets function best in the presence of clearly
defined property rights. We should protect not only the property rights of
innovators but also the rights of those who have legitimately obtained a copy
of the idea, directly or indirectly, from the original innovator. The former
encourages innovation; the latter encourages the diffusion, adoption, and
improvement of innovations.
Why, however, should creators have the right to control how purchasers
make use of an idea or creation? This gives creators a monopoly over the
idea. We refer to this right as “intellectual monopoly,” to emphasize that it is
P1: KNP head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-01 cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 April 29, 2008 17:24

Introduction 9

this monopoly over all copies of an idea that is controversial, not the right to
buy and sell copies. The government does not ordinarily enforce monopolies
for producers of other goods. This is because it is widely recognized that
monopoly creates many social costs. Intellectual monopoly is no different
in this respect. The question we address is whether it also creates social
benefits commensurate with these social costs.
∗∗∗
The U.S. Constitution allows Congress “to promote the progress of science
and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the
exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.”18 Our perspec-
tive on patents and copyright is a similar one: promoting the progress of
science and the useful arts is a crucial ingredient of economic welfare, from
solving such profound economic problems as poverty to such mundane
personal nuisances as boredom. From a social point of view, and in the view
of the founding fathers, the purpose of patents and copyrights is not to
enrich the few at the expense of the many. Nobody doubts that J. K. Rowling
and Bill Gates have been greatly enriched by their “intellectual property” –
nor is it surprising that they would argue in favor of it. But common sense
and the U.S. Constitution say that these rights must be justified by bringing
benefits to all of us.
The U.S. Constitution is explicit that what is to be given to authors and
inventors is an exclusive right – a monopoly. Implicit is the idea that giving
this monopoly serves to promote the progress of science and useful arts. The
U.S. Constitution was written in 1787. At that time, the idea of copyright
and patent was relatively new; the products to which they applied, few; and
their terms, short. In light of the experience of the subsequent 219 years,
we might ask, Is it true that legal grants of monopoly serve to promote the
progress of science and the useful arts?
Certainly common sense suggests that they should. How are musicians
to make a living if the moment they perform their music, everyone else can
copy and give it away for free? Why would the large corporations pay small
inventors when they can simply take their ideas? It is hard to imagine life
without the Internet, and today we are all jet-setters. Is not the explosion of
creativity and invention unleashed since the writing of the U.S. Constitution
a testimony to the powerful benefit of “intellectual property”? Would not
the world without patent and copyright be a sad, cold world, empty of new
music and of marvelous new inventions?
So, the first question we will pose is, What might the world be like
without intellectual monopoly? Patents and copyrights have not secured
monopolies on all ideas at all times. It is natural, then, to examine times
P1: KNP head margin: 1/2 gutter margin: 7/8
CUUS245-01 cuus245 978 0 521 87928 6 April 29, 2008 17:24

10 Against Intellectual Monopoly

and industries in which legal protection for ideas has not been available to
see whether innovation and creativity were thriving or were stifled. It is the
case, for example, that neither the Internet nor the jet engine was invented in
hopes of securing exclusive rights. In fact, we ordinarily think of innovative
monopoly as an oxymoron. We shall see that when monopoly over ideas is
absent, competition is fierce – and that, as a result, innovation and creativity
thrive. Whatever a world without patents and copyrights would be like, it
would not be a world devoid of great new music and beneficial new drugs.
You will gather by now that we are skeptical of monopoly – as are
economists in general. Our second topic will be an examination of the
many social costs created by copyrights and patents. Adam Smith – a friend
and teacher of James Watt – was one of the first economists to explain how
monopolies make less available at a higher price. In some cases, such as
the production of music, this may not be a great social evil; in other cases,
such as the availability of AIDS drugs, it may be a very great evil indeed.
However, as we shall see, low availability and high price is only one of the
many costs of monopoly. The example of James Watt is a case in point: by
making use of the legal system, he inhibited competition and prevented his
competitors from introducing useful new advances. We shall also see that
because there are no countervailing market forces, government-enforced
monopolies such as intellectual monopoly are particularly problematic.
Although monopoly may be evil, and although innovation may thrive in
the absence of traditional legal protections such as patents and copyrights,
it may be that patents and copyrights serve to increase innovation. The
presumption in the U.S. Constitution is that they do, and that the benefits
of more entertainment and more innovation outweigh the costs of these
monopolies. Certainly the monopolies created by patents and copyright
may be troublesome – but if that is the cost of having blockbuster movies,
automobiles, and flu vaccine, most of us are prepared to put up with it. That
is the position traditionally taken by economists, most of whom support
patents and copyright, at least in principle. Some of them take the view that
intellectual monopoly is an unavoidable evil if we are to have any innovation
at all; other simply argue that at least some modest amount of intellectual
monopoly is desirable to provide adequate incentive for innovation and
creation. Our third topic will be an examination of the theoretical arguments
supporting intellectual monopoly, as well as counterarguments about why
intellectual monopoly may hurt rather than foster creative activity.
It is crucial to recognize that intellectual monopoly is a double-edged
sword. The rewards to innovative effort are certainly greater if success is
awarded a government monopoly. But the existence of monopolies also
Another Random Scribd Document
with Unrelated Content
 122 Chapter 7 Conservation of Energy Final state: energy +
kx¢. We don’t know the final-state potential energy, but we Ce igh
do know that it’s gravitational energy—and with the zero of potential
I, =O LY energy at the bottom, it’s U = mgh. With K = Ky = 0, Up =
skx, and U = mgh, Equation 7.6 reads 0 + mgh = 0 + 5 kxo”. We
then solve for the unknown h to get Initial State: = kx? K =O (140
N/m) (0.11 m)? h= = —= 1.7m 2mg (2) (0.050 kg) (9.8 m/s”) —=
— 4 E, ASSESS Again, the answer in algebraic form makes sense;
the stiffer the spring or the more it’s compressed, the higher the
block will go. But if the block is more massive or gravity is stronger,
then the block 4° 7 won’t get as far. SS ~ ee | OR a ee Ne ert etc:
meh tnt mn I Rae Ran ete > @ SAVE STEPS You might be tempted
to solve first for the @ WwW block's speed when it leaves the spring
and then equate WwW ;mv? to mgh to find the height. You could—
but conservation 0 = am ol —_ of mechanical energy shortcuts all
the details, getting you K U U right from the initial to the final state.
As long as energy is K Us Ug S Gi conserved, you don’t need to
worry about what happens in between. FIGURE 7.7 Our sketches for
Example 7.5. ll 7.3 A bowling ball is tied to the end of a long rope
and suspended from the ceiling. =) A student stands at one side of
the room and holds the ball to her nose, then releases S it from rest.
Should she duck as it swings back? Explain. 7.4 Nonconservative
Forces LO 7.4 Evaluate situations where nonconservative forces
result in loss of mechanical energy. In the examples in Section 7.3,
we assumed that mechanical energy was strictly conserved. In the
everyday world of friction and other nonconservative forces,
however, conservation of mechanical energy is sometimes a
reasonable approximation and sometimes not. When it’s not, we
have to consider energy transformations associated with
nonconservative forces.
 7.4 Nonconservative Forces 123 Friction is a
nonconservative force. Recall from Chapter 5 that friction is actually
a complex phenomenon, involving the making and breaking of
microscopic bonds between two surfaces in contact (review Fig.
5.18). Associated with these bonds are myriad force application
points, and different points may undergo different displacements
depending on the strengths of the temporary bonds. For these
reasons it’s difficult to calculate, or even to define unambiguously,
the work done by friction. What friction and other nonconservative
forces do, however, is unambiguous: They convert the kinetic energy
of macroscopic objects into kinetic energy associated with the
random motions of individual molecules. Although we’re still talking
about kinetic energy, there’s a huge difference between the kinetic
energy of a macroscopic object like a moving car, with all its parts
participating in a common motion, versus the random motions of
molecules going helter-skelter in every direction with a range of
speeds. We’ ll explore that difference in Chapter 19, where we’ll find
that, among other profound implications, it places serious constraints
on our ability to extract useful energy from fuels. You'll also see, in
Chapter 18, that molecular energy may include potential energy
associated with stretching of spring-like molecular bonds. The
combination of molecular kinetic and potential energy is called
internal energy or thermal energy, and we give it the symbol E, .
Here “internal” implies that this energy is contained within an object
and that it isn’t as obvious as the kinetic energy associated with
overall motion of the entire object. The alternative term “thermal”
hints that internal energy is associated with temperature, heat, and
related phenomena. We’ll see in Chapters 16—19 that temperature
is a measure of the internal energy per molecule, and that what you
probably think of as “heat” is actually internal energy. In physics,
“heat” has a very specific meaning: It designates another way of
transferring energy to a system, in addition to the mechanical work
we’ve considered in Chapters 6 and 7. So friction and other
nonconservative forces convert mechanical energy into internal
energy. How much internal energy? Both theory and experiment give
a simple answer: The amount of mechanical energy converted to
internal energy is given by the product of the nonconservative force
with the distance over which it acts. With friction, that means AE in,
= fd, where d is the distance over which the frictional force acts.
(Here we write kinetic friction f, explicitly because static friction f,
does not convert mechanical energy to internal energy because
there’s no relative motion involved.) Since the increase in internal
energy comes at the expense of mechanical energy K + U, we can
write AK + AU = —AEw = —ficed (7.7) Example 7.6 describes a
system in which friction converts mechanical energy to internal
energy. 7.4 For which of the following systems is (1) mechanical
energy conserved and (2) total energy conserved? (a) the system is
isolated, and all forces among its constituents are conservative; (b)
the system is not isolated, and work is done on it by external forces;
(c) the system is isolated, and some forces among its constituents
are not conservative | Nonconservative Forces: A Sliding Block A
block of mass m is launched from a spring of constant k that’s
initially compressed a distance x9. After leaving the spring, the block
slides on a horizontal surface with frictional coefficient 1. Find an
expression for the distance the block slides before coming to rest.
INTERPRET The presence of friction means that mechanical energy
isn’t conserved. But we can still identify the kinetic and potential
energy in the initial state: The kinetic energy is zero and the
potential energy is that of the spring. In the final state, there’s no
mechanical energy at all. The nonconservative frictional force
converts the block’s mechanical energy into internal energy of the
block and the surface it’s sliding on. The block comes to rest when
all its mechanical energy has been converted. (continued)
 124 Chapter 7 Conservation of Energy DEVELOP Figure 7.8
shows the situation. With Ky) = 0, we determine the total initial
energy from Equation 7.4, Uy = Skxp. As the block slides a distance
d, Equation 7.7 shows that the frictional force converts mechanical
energy equal to fd into internal energy. All the mechanical energy
will be gone, therefore, when f,d = 5 kx. Here the frictional force has
magnitude J = Un = wmg, where in this case of a horizontal surface
the normal force n has the same magnitude as the weight mg. So
our statement that all the mechanical energy gets converted to
internal energy becomes kx = med. EVALUATE We solve this
equation for the unknown distance d to get d = kxy'/2umg. Since we
weren’t given numbers, there’s nothing further to evaluate. ASSESS
Make sense? The stiffer the spring or the more it’s compressed, the
farther the block goes. The greater the friction or the normal force
mg, the sooner the block stops. If 1 = 0, mechanical energy is once
again conserved; then our result shows that the block would slide
forever. © Energy> Eventually the block stops, its mechanical
energy gone. Frictional fe = e surface “ln m Initially there’s potential
energy in the compressed spring. y m ms, “* Frictional force acts to
oppose the motion. Xo a End of spring when uncompressed co
Energy> co Energy> oc Energy> U FIGURE 7.8 Intermediate bar
charts show gradual conversion of mechanical energy into internal
energy. Ke ke Tee S| = a K aS) 5 7.5 Conservation of Energy LO 7.5
Distinguish internal energy from mechanical energy. We often speak
of energy being “lost” due to friction, or to air resistance, or to
electrical resistance in power transmission. But that energy isn’t
really lost; instead, as we’ve just seen for friction, it’s converted to
internal energy. Physically, the internal energy manifests itself by
warming the system. So the energy really is still there; it’s just that
we can’t get it back as the kinetic energy of macroscopic objects.
Accounting for internal energy leads to a broader statement of
energy conservation. Rearranging the first equality of Equation 7.7
lets us write AK + AU + AE, = 0 This equation shows that the sum
of the kinetic, potential, and internal energy of an isolated system
doesn’t change even though energy may be converted among these
three different forms. You can see this conservation of energy
graphically in Fig. 7.8, which plots all three forms of energy for the
situation of Example 7.6. So far we’ve considered only isolated
systems, in which all forces are internal to the system. For Example
7.6 to be about an isolated system, for instance, that system had to
include the spring, the block, and the surface on which the block
slides. What if a system isn’t isolated? Then external forces may do
work on it, increasing its energy. Or the system may do work on its
environment, decreasing its energy. In that case we can generalize
Equation 7.7 to read AK + AU + AEnn = Went (7.8) where W.,, is the
work done on the system by forces acting from outside. If W.,, is
positive, then this external work adds energy to the system; if it’s
negative, then the system does work on its surroundings, and its
total energy decreases. Recall that doing work is the mechanical
means of transferring energy; in Chapters 16-18 we’ll introduce heat
as a nonmechanical energy-transfer mechanism, and we’ll develop a
statement like Equation 7.8 that includes energy transfers by both
work and heat. Energy Conservation: The Big Picture So far we’ve
considered kinetic energy, potential energy, and internal energy, and
we’ve explored energy transfer by mechanical work and by
dissipative forces like friction.
 We’ve also hinted at energy transfer by heat, to be defined
in Chapter 16. But there are other forms of energy, and other
energy-transfer mechanisms. In Part 3, you’ll explore
electromagnetism, and you’ll see how energy can be stored in both
electric and magnetic fields; their combination into electromagnetic
waves results in energy transfer by electromagnetic radiation—the
process that delivers life-sustaining energy from Sun to Earth and
that also carries your cell phone conversations and data.
Electromagnetic fields interact with matter, so energy transfers
among electromagnetic, mechanical, and internal energy are
important processes in the everyday physics of both natural and
technological systems. But again, for any isolated system, such
transfers only interchange types of energy and don’t change the
total amount of energy. Energy, it seems, is strictly conserved. In
Newtonian physics, conservation of energy stands alongside the
equally fundamental principle of conservation of mass (the
statement that the total mass of an isolated system can’t change). A
closer look, however, shows that neither principle stands by itself. If
you measure precisely enough the mass of a system before it emits
energy, and again afterward, you’ll find that the mass has
decreased. Einstein’s equation E = mc” describes this effect, which
ultimately shows that mass and energy are interchangeable. So
Einstein replaces the separate conservation laws for mass and
energy with a single statement: conservation of mass-energy. You’ll
see how mass-energy interchangeability arises when we study
relativity in Chapter 33. Until then, we’ll be dealing in the realm of
Newtonian physics, where it’s an excellent approximation to assume
that energy and mass are separately conserved. 7.5 Consider Earth
and its atmosphere as a system. Which of the following processes
conserves the total energy of this system? (a) a volcano erupts,
spewing hot gases and particulate matter high into the atmosphere;
(b) a small asteroid plunges into Earth’s atmosphere, heating and
exploding high over the planet; (c) over geologic time, two
continents collide, and the one that is subducted under the other
heats up and undergoes melting; (d) a solar flare delivers high-
energy particles to Earth’s upper atmosphere, lighting the
atmosphere with colorful auroras; (e) a hurricane revs up its winds,
extracting energy from water vapor evaporated from warm tropical
seas; (f) coal burns in numerous power plants, and uranium fissions
in nuclear reactors, with both processes sending electrical energy
into the world’s power grids and dumping warmed water into the
environment GOT IT? 7.6 Potential-Energy Curves LO 7.6 Work with
potential-energy curves for a wide variety of systems. Figure 7.9
shows a frictionless roller-coaster track. How fast must a car be
coasting at point A if it’s to reach point D? Conservation of
mechanical energy provides the answer. To get to D, the car must
clear peak C. Clearing C requires that the total energy exceed the
potential energy at C; that is, +mv¢ + mgh, > mghc, where we’ve
taken the zero of potential energy with the car at the bottom of the
track. Solving for v4 gives vy > V2g(hc — ha). If v4 satisfies this
inequality, the car will reach C with some kinetic energy remaining
and will coast over the peak. Figure 7.9 is a drawing of the actual
roller-coaster track. But because gravitational potential energy is
directly proportional to height, it’s also a plot of potential energy
versus position: a potential-energy curve. Conceptual Example 7.1
shows how we can study the car’s motion by plotting total energy on
the same graph as the potential-energy curve. 7.6 Potential-Energy
Curves 125 he A B c D FIGURE 7.9 A roller-coaster track.
 126 Chapter 7 Conservation of Energy CONCEPTUAL
EXAMPLE 7.1 Potential-Energy Curves Figure 7.10 plots potential
energy for our roller-coaster system, along with three possible
values for the total mechanical energy. Since mechanical energy is
conserved in the absence of nonconservative forces, the total-energy
curve is a horizontal line. Use these graphs to describe the motion of
a roller-coaster car, initially at point A and moving to the right.
EVALUATE We’re assuming there are no nonconservative forces (an
approximation for a real roller coaster), so mechanical energy Total
energy is high enough that the car can move anywhere. & Potential
energy, U Position, x (a) With lower total energy, the car is confined
between these points. Potential energy, U Position, x (b) Now the car
is confined to this region. Potential energy, U Position, x (c) FIGURE
7.10 Potential and total energy for a roller coaster. is conserved. In
each figure, the sum of kinetic and potential energy therefore
remains equal to the value set by the line indicating the total energy.
When the roller-coaster car rises, potential energy increases and
kinetic energy consequently decreases. But as long as potential
energy remains below the total energy, the car still has kinetic
energy and is still moving. Anywhere potential energy equals the
total energy, the car has no kinetic energy and is momentarily at
rest. In Fig. 7.10a the car’s total energy exceeds the maximum
potential energy. Therefore, it can move anywhere from its initial
position at A. Since it’s initially moving to the right, it will clear peaks
B and C and will end up at D still moving to the right—and, since D
is lower than A, it will be moving faster than it was at A. In Fig.
7.10b the highest peak in the potential-energy curve exceeds the
total energy; so does the very leftmost portion of the curve.
Therefore, the car will move rightward from A, clearing peak B, but
will come to a stop just before peak C, a so-called turning point
where potential energy equals the total energy. Then it will roll back
down to the left, again clearing peak B and climbing to another
turning point where the potential-energy curve and total-energy line
again intersect. Absent friction, it will run back and forth between
the two turning points. In Fig. 7.10c the total energy is lower, and
the car can’t clear peak B. So now it will run back and forth between
the two turning points we’ve marked. ASSESS Make sense? Yes: The
higher the total energy, the larger the extent of the car’s allowed
motion. That’s because, for a given potential energy, the car it has
more energy available in the form of kinetic energy. MAKING THE
CONNECTION Find a condition on the speed at A that will allow the
car to move beyond peak B. EVALUATE With total energy equal to
Up, the car could just barely clear peak B. The initial energy is Sma
+ mgh,, where va and hy are the car’s speed and height at A, and
where we’ve taken the zero of potential energy at the bottom of the
curve. Requiring that this quantity exceed Uz = mghg then gives v4
> V 2g(hg — hy). Even though the car in Figs. 7.10b and c can’t get
to D, the total energy still exceeds the potential energy at D. But the
car is blocked from reaching D by the potential barrier of peak C. We
say that it’s trapped in a potential well between its turning points.
Potential-energy curves are useful even with nongravitational forces
where there’s no direct correspondence with hills and valleys. The
terminology used here—potential barriers, wells, and trapping—
remains appropriate in such cases and indeed is widely used
throughout physics. Figure 7.11 shows the potential energy of a
system comprising a pair of hydrogen atoms, as a function of their
separation. This energy is associated with attractive and repulsive
electrical forces involving the electrons and the nuclei of the two
atoms. The potential-energy curve exhibits a potential well, showing
that the atoms can form a bound system in which they’re unable to
separate fully. That bound system is a hydrogen molecule (H,). The
minimum energy, —7.6X 10-'° J, corresponds to the molecule’s
equilibrium separation of 0.074 nm. It’s convenient to define the
zero of potential energy when the atoms are infinitely far apart; Fig.
7.11 then shows that any total energy less than zero results in a
bound system. But if the total energy is greater than zero, the atoms
are free to move arbitrarily far apart, so they don’t form a molecule.
 7.6 Potential-Energy Curves 127 The zero of energy
corresponds to a large atomic separation. 0.3 0.4 85 64 i a 2: ; S
Atomic separation (nm) =o TT > 60 o e929 72 = : a At total
energies less The minimum potential than zero, the atoms energy
gives the 22 oll are bound into a equilibrium separation molecule. of
the molecule. —g wT FIGURE 7.11 Potential-energy curve for two
hydrogen atoms. Molecular Energy: Finding Atomic Separation Very
near the bottom of the potential well in Fig. 7.11, the potential
energy of the two-atom system is given approximately by U = Up +
a(x — x)”, where Uy = —0.760 aJ, a = 286 aJ/nm”, and Xp = 0.0741
nm is the equilibrium separation. What range of atomic separations
is allowed if the total energy is —0.717 aJ? INTERPRET This problem
sounds complicated, with strange units and talk of molecular
energies. But it’s about just what’s shown in Figs. 7.10 and 7.11.
Specifically, we’re given the total energy and asked to find the
turning points—the points where the line representing total energy
intersects the potential-energy curve. If the units look strange,
remember the SI prefixes (there’s a table inside the front cover),
which we use to avoid writing large powers of 10. Here 1 aJ = 10 8 J
and 1 nm = 10° m. DEVELOP Figure 7.12 is a plot of the potential-
energy curve from the function we’ve been given. The straight line
represents the total energy E. The turning points are the values of
atomic separation where the two curves intersect. We could read
them off the graph, or we can solve algebraically by setting the total
energy equal to the potential energy. EVALUATE With the potential
energy given by U = Uy + a(x — x)” and the total energy E, the two
turning points occur when E = Uy + a(x — xy)”. We could solve
directly for x, but then we'd have to use the quadratic formula.
Solving for x — xg is easier: i = Wf —0.717 aJ — (—0.760 aJ) X-—
X= + = 5 5 a 286 aJ/nm: = £0.0123 nm Force and Potential Energy
Then the turning points are at x» + 0.0123 nm—namely, 0.0864 nm
and 0.0618 nm. ASSESS Make sense? A look at Fig. 7.12 shows that
we’ve correctly located the turning points. The fact that its potential-
energy curve is parabolic (like a spring’s U = 5 kx?) shows that the
molecule can be modeled approximately as two atoms joined by a
spring. Chemists frequently use such models and even talk of the
“spring constant” of the bond joining atoms into a molecule. ~ Zero
total energy is that way. Energy (aJ) | | | | S —] S = n N N nq a &
Nn =) 0.06 OOF 0.08 0.09%, 2 A parabolic curve shows the
molecule acts like two H atoms connected ae = by a spring. Here’s
the equilibrium separation. *% With total energy E, the atoms * are
trapped between these points. FIGURE 7.12 Analyzing the hydrogen
molecule. The roller-coaster track in Fig. 7.9 traces the potential-
energy curve for a car on the track. But it also shows the force
acting to accelerate the car: Where the graph is steep—that is,
where the potential energy is changing rapidly—the force is greatest.
At the peaks and valleys, the force is zero. So it’s the slope of the
potential-energy curve that tells us about the force (Fig. 7.13).
 128 Chapter 7 Conservation of Energy At peaks and valleys,
Force is greater wi where the curve w e 1s steeper. Potential energy,
U Position, x When the curve is rising to the right, force is to the
/eft. FIGURE 7.13 Force depends on the s/ope of the potential-
energy curve. 7.6 The figure shows the potential energy associated
with an electron in a microelectronic device. From among the labeled
points, find (1) the point where the force on the electron is greatest,
(2) the rightmost position possible if the electron has total energy
EF), (3) the leftmost position possible if the electron has total energy
E, and starts out to the right of D, (4) a point where the force on the
electron is zero, and (5) a point where the force on the electron
points to the left. In some cases there may be more than one
answer. GOT IT? Just how strong is this force? Consider a small
change Ax, so small that the force is essentially constant over this
distance. Then we can use Equation 7.2b to write AU = —F, Ax, or F,
= —AU/Ax. In the limit Ax — 0, AU/Ax becomes the derivative, and
we have dU ck (7.9) E= This equation makes mathematical as well
as physical sense. We’ve already written potential energy as the
integral of force over distance, so it’s no surprise that force is the
derivative of potential energy. Equation 7.9 gives the force
component in the x-direction only. In a three-dimensional situation,
we’d have to take derivatives of potential energy with respect to y
and z to find the full force vector. Why the minus sign in Equation
7.9? You can see the answer in the molecular energy curve of Fig.
7.11, where pushing the atoms too close together—moving to the
left of equilibrium—tesults in a repulsive force to the right, and
pulling them apart—moving to the right—gives an attractive force to
the /eft. You can see the same thing for the roller coaster in Fig.
7.13. In both cases the forces tend to drive the system back toward
a minimumenergy state. We'll explore such minimum-energy
equilibrium states further in Chapter 12. Potential energy, U -yelt-ava
Summary Big Ideas The big idea here is conservation of energy. This
chapter emphasizes the special case of systems subject only to
conservative forces, in which case the total mechanical energy—the
sum of kinetic and potential energy—cannot change. Energy may
change from kinetic to potential, and vice versa, but the total
remains constant. Applying conservation of mechanical energy
requires the concept of potential energy—energy stored in a system
as a result of work done against conservative forces. A block is
against a compressed spring; the system’s energy is all potential.
Later, the block is moving. The total energy is still the same, but now
it’s all kinetic. v a Later, the ball is still moving but --..., more slowly.
The * sum of kinetic and potential energy equals the initial energy. A
ball is rolling on a slope. At the bottom the energy is all kinetic. oS
Energy> co Energy> K U K © Energy> co Energy> U KU. KU If
nonconservative forces act in a system, then mechanical energy isn’t
conserved; instead, mechanical energy gets converted to internal
energy.
 Applications 129 Key Concepts and Equations The
important new concept here is a % potential energy, defined as the
neg- AU ap = -[ Fear AU= -| F(x)dx AU = —F (x, — x1) ative of the
work done by a conser#1 vative force. Only the change AU has This
one is the most general, but it’s This is a special case, when force
This is the most specialized case, physical significance. Expressions
mathematically involved. The force and displacement are in the
same where the force is constant. for potential energy include: can
vary over an arbitrary path direction and force may vary with
between points A and B. position. Given the concept of potential
energy, the principle of conservation of : | Wecan describe a wide
range of systems—from molecules to roller mechanical energy
follows from the work—kinetic energy theorem of : coasters to
planets—in terms of potential-energy curves. Knowing Chapter 6.
Here’s the mathematical statement of mechanical energy : _ the
total energy then lets us find turning points that determine the
conservation: : range of motion available to the system. K+U=Ky +
Us With a little more A ball with we y R, : 5 energy, the ball could
total energy E a ‘ a s clear this potential -.., is trapped between K
and U are the The total mechanical Ko and Up are i) barrier. = yet
Pome: ae F : ae = a |, > CR Total kinetic and potential | energy is
conserved, _ the kinetic and ) pene energy at some point as
indicated by the potential energy 3 E gy where we don’t know —
equal sign. at some point 3 one of these where both are &£
quantities. known. Ky + Up is the total : mechanical energy. :
Position, x Applications Two important cases of potential energy D
are the elastic potential energy of a spring, AVAVAVAYAVAY ow iced
=a = U= aka”, and the gravitational potential j ‘ | energy change, AU
= mgh, associated i ; Lifting an object with lifting an object of mass
m through WA —— Compression or stretch by a H a height /
increases a height h. | distance x gives the spring 1 potential energy
2 —_x WAVAVAVAVAY potential energy U = $kx’. @ by AU = mgh.
ee rs, serene ae The former is limited to ideal springs for ; which F =
—kx, the latter to the proximity of Earth’s surface, where the
variation of gravity with height is negligible. F > Go to
www.masteringphysics.com to access assigned homework and self-
study tools such as Masteri ng Phys Ics Dynamic Study Modules,
practice quizzes, video solutions to problems, and a whole lot more!
BIO Biology and/or medicine-related problens DATA Data problens
ENV Environmental problens CH Challenge problens CONMIP
Computer problems Learning Outcomes After finishing this chapter,
you should be able to: LO 7.1 Distinguish conservative from
nonconservative forces. 7.46, 7.47, 7.48, 7.49, 7.55, 7.59, 7.62, 7.63,
7.65, 7.66, 7.67, For Thought and Discussion Questions 7.1, 7.3, 7.8;
7.69 Exercises 7.9, 7.10 Evaluate situations where nonconservative
forces result in Calculate potential energy, especially with gravity and
springs. loss of mechanical energy. For Thought and Discussion
Question 7.4; Exercises 7.11, Exercises 7.22, 7.23; Problems 7.53,
7.56, 7.57, 7.61, 7.64 7.12, 7.13, 7.14, 7.15, 7.16; Problems 7.35,
7.36, 7.37, 7.38, Distinguish internal energy from mechanical energy.
7.39, 7.44, 7.51, 7.54, 7.58, 7.63, 7.68 Work with potential-energy
curves for a wide variety of Use conservation of mechanical energy
to solve problems systems. that would be difficult using Newton’s
second law. For Thought and Discussion Questions 7.5, 7.6, 7.7, 7.8;
For Thought and Discussion Question 7.2; Exercises 7.17, Exercises
7.24, 7.25, 7.26; Problems 7.50, 7.52, 7.60 7.18, 7.19, 7.20, 7.21;
Problems 7.40, 7.41, 7.42, 7.43, 7.45,
 130 Chapter 7 Conservation of Energy For Thought and
Discussion > Figure 7.14 shows force vectors at different points in
space for two forces. Which is conservative and which
nonconservative? Explain. tt jPtttt tttett tt} ttt tt (a) (b) FIGURE 7.14
For Thought and Discussion 1 Is the conservation-of-mechanical-
energy principle related to Newton’s laws, or is it an entirely
separate physical principle? Discuss. Why can’t we define a potential
energy associated with friction? Can potential energy be negative?
Can kinetic energy? Can total mechanical energy? Explain. If the
potential energy is zero at a given point, must the force also be zero
at that point? Give an example. If the force is zero at a given point,
must the potential energy also be zero at that point? Give an
example. If the difference in potential energy between two points is
zero, does that necessarily mean that an object moving between
those points experiences no force? If conservation of energy is a law
of nature, why do we have programs—like mileage requirements for
cars or insulation standards for buildings—designed to encourage
energy conservation? Exercises and Problems Exercises Section 7.1
Conservative and Nonconservative Forces 9. 10. Determine the work
you would have (a)| L——_ to do to move a block of mass m from
(eae aaa era point | to point 2 at constant speed if over the two
paths shown in Fig. 7.15. L P The coefficient of friction has the con-
_¢ (b) stant value w over the surface. Note: The diagram lies in a
horizontal plane. Now take Fig. 7.15 to lie in a vertical plane, and
find the work done by the gravitational force as an object moves
from point | to point 2 over each of the paths shown. me -- ke
FIGURE 7.15 Exercises 9 and 10 Section 7.2 Potential Energy 11. 12.
13. Rework Example 7.1, now taking the zero of potential energy at
street level. Find the potential energy associated with a 70-kg hiker
(a) atop New Hampshire’s Mount Washington, 1900 m above sea
level, and (b) in Death Valley, California, 86 m below sea level. Take
the zero of potential energy at sea level. You fly from Boston’s Logan
Airport, at sea level, to Denver, altitude 1.6 km. Taking your mass as
65 kg and the zero of potential energy at Boston, what’s the
gravitational potential energy when you’re (a) at the plane’s 11-km
cruising altitude and (b) in Denver? 14. 15. 16. BIO How much
energy can be stored in a spring with k = 320 N/m if the maximum
allowed stretch is 18 cm? How far would you have to stretch a
spring with k = 1.4kN/m for it to store 210 J of energy? A
biophysicist grabs the ends of a DNA strand with optical tweezers
and stretches it 26 Um. How much energy is stored in the stretched
molecule if its spring constant is 0.046 pN/um? Section 7.3
Conservation of Mechanical Energy 17. 18. 19. 20. 2, A skier starts
down a frictionless 32° slope. After a vertical drop of 25 m, the slope
temporarily levels out and then slopes down at 20°, dropping an
additional 38 m vertically before leveling out again. Find the skier’s
speed on the two level stretches. A 10,000-kg Navy jet lands on an
aircraft carrier and snags a cable to slow it down. The cable is
attached to a spring with k = 40 kN/m. If the spring stretches 25 m
to stop the plane, what was its landing speed? A 120-g arrow is shot
vertically from a bow whose effective spring constant is 430 N/m. If
the bow is drawn 71 cm before shooting, to what height does the
arrow rise? In a railroad yard, a 35,000-kg boxcar moving at 7.5 m/s
is stopped by a spring-loaded bumper mounted at the end of the
level track. If k = 2.8 MN/m, how far does the spring compress in
stopping the boxcar? You work for a toy company, and you’re
designing a springlaunched model rocket. The launching apparatus
has room for a spring that can be compressed 14 cm, and the
rocket’s mass is 65 g. If the rocket is to reach an altitude of 35 m,
what should you specify for the spring constant? Section 7.4
Nonconservative Forces 22. 23; A 54-kg ice skater pushes off the
wall of the rink, giving herself an initial speed of 3.2 m/s. She then
coasts with no further effort. If the frictional coefficient between
skates and ice is 0.023, how far does she go? You push a 33-kg
table across a 6.2-m-wide room. In the process, 1.5 kJ of
mechanical energy gets converted to internal energy of the
table/floor system. What’s the coefficient of kinetic friction between
table and floor? Section 7.6 Potential-Energy Curves 24. 25. 26. A
particle slides along the frictionless track shown in Fig. 7.16, starting
at rest from point A. Find (a) its speed at B, (b) its speed at C, and
(c) the approximate location of its right-hand turning point. Position,
x (m) FIGURE 7.16 Exercise 24 A particle slides back and forth on a
frictionless track whose height as a function of horizontal position x
is y = ax’, where a = 0.92 m|. If the particle’s maximum speed is 8.5
m/s, find its turning points. A particle is trapped in a potential well
described by U(x) = 16x? — b, with U in joules, x in meters, and b =
4.0]. Find the force on the particle when it’s at (a) x = 2.1 m, (b) x
= 0, and (c)x = —1.4m.
 Example Variations The following problems are based on
two examples from the text. Each set of four problems is designed
to help you make connections that enhance your understanding of
physics and to build your confidence in solving problems that differ
from ones you’ve seen before. The first problem in each set is
essentially the example problem but with different numbers. The
second problem presents the same scenario as the example but asks
a different question. The third and fourth problems repeat this
pattern but with entirely different scenarios. 27. (Example!7i3! A
climbing rope is designed to exert a force given by F = -kx + bx,
where k = 244 N/m, b = 3.24 N/m’, and x is the stretch in meters.
Find the potential energy stored in the rope when it’s been stretched
4.68 m. Take U = 0 when the rope isn’t stretched—that is, when x =
0. Is this more or less than if the rope were an ideal spring with the
same spring constant k? 28. [Examplel7i3 A climbing rope exerts a
force given by F = —kx — cx’. Find an expression for c such that
when the rope is stretched a distance d its potential energy is twice
what it would be if the rope were an ideal spring with F = — kx. 29,
(EXAmplel7i3 The force on an electron in an experimental nanoscale
electronic device is given by F = — kx + bx°, where k = 0.113
nN/nm, b = 0.00185 nN/nm?, and x is measured in nanometers
from the electron’s equilibrium position at x = 0. Find the potential
energy when the electron is 2.14 nm from its equilibrium position.
30. (EXAmple73? The potential energy of an electron in an
experimental nanoscale electronic device is given by U = 1.27x* —
0.260x", where U is in aJ(1 aJ = 107!8J) and x is the electron’s
position in nanometers. Find the x-component of the force on the
electron when it’s atx = 1.47 nm. 31. (Eample7S! In Fig. 7.7, take
the spring to have k = 87.5 N/m and consider the track to be
frictionless. A 50.2-g mass is initially pushed against the spring,
compressing it 7.88 cm. When the mass is released, to what vertical
height up the track does it rise? 32. [EXamplev7i5! In Fig. 7.7, take
the spring to have k = 107 N/m. 33; You’re using the spring to
launch a 75.0-g mass, and you want it to rise to a vertical height of
96.8 cm. How far should you compress the spring? In a railroad
switchyard, a rail car of mass 28,600 kg starts from rest and rolls
down an incline and onto a level stretch of track. It then hits a
spring bumper at the end of the track. If the spring constant is 1.88
MN/m and if the spring compresses a maximum of 1.03 m, what’s
the height at which the car started? Neglect friction. 34, (EXAmpleS3
In a railroad switchyard, a rail car of mass 41,700 kg starts from rest
and rolls down a 2.65-m-high incline and onto a level stretch of
track. It then hits a spring bumper, whose spring compresses 89.4
cm. Find the spring constant. Problems 35. ENV 36. The reservoir at
Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project is 214 m above the
pump/generators and holds 2.1 10'° kg of water (see Application on
p. 117). The generators can produce electrical energy at the rate of
1.08 GW. Find (a) the gravitational potential energy stored, taking
zero potential energy at the generators, and (b) the length of time
the station can generate power before the reservoir is drained. A
carbon monoxide molecule can be modeled as a carbon atom and an
oxygen atom connected by a spring. If a displacement of the carbon
by 1.46 pm from its equilibrium position relative to the oxygen
increases the molecule’s potential energy by 0.0125 eV, what’s the
spring constant? Si. 38. BIO 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. BIO 45. 46.
Exercises and Problems 131 A more accurate expression for the
force law of the rope in Example 7.3 is F = —kx + bx* — cx*, where
k and b have the values given in Example 7.3 and c = 3.1 N/m’, Find
the energy stored in stretching the rope 2.62 m. By what percentage
does your result differ from that of Example 7.3? For small stretches,
the Achilles tendon can be modeled as an ideal spring. Experiments
using a particular tendon showed that it stretched 2.66 mm when a
125-kg mass was hung from it. (a) Find the spring constant of this
tendon. (b) How much would it have to stretch to store 50.0 J of
energy? A particle moves along the x-axis under the influence of a
force F = ax’ + b, where a and b are constants. Find the potential
energy as a function of position, taking U = Oat x = 0. As a highway
engineer, you’re asked to design a runaway truck lane on a mountain
road. The lane will head uphill at 30° and should be able to
accommodate a 16,000-kg truck with failed brakes entering the lane
at 110 km/h. How long should you make the lane? Neglect friction. A
spring of constant k, compressed a distance x, is used to launch
amass m up a frictionless slope at angle 0. Find an expression for
the maximum distance along the slope that the mass moves after
leaving the spring. A child is on a swing whose 3.2-m-long chains
make a maximum angle of 50° with the vertical. What’s the child’s
maximum speed? With x — x9 = handa = g, Equation 2.11 gives the
speed of an object thrown downward with initial speed vo after it’s
dropped a distance h: v = V ve + 2gh. Use conservation of
mechanical energy to derive the same result. ie o The nuchal
ligament is a cord-like structure that runs along the back of the neck
and supports much of the head’s weight in animals like horses and
cows. The liga- 0.0———+—_+> 11+ f ‘ 02 4 6 8 10 12 14 ment is
extremely stiff for Stretch (em) small stretches, but loosens as it
stretches further, thus functioning as a biological shock absorber.
Figure 7.17 shows the force—distance curve for a particular nuchal
ligament; the curve can be modeled approximately by the expression
F(x) = 0.43x — 0.033x? + 0.00086x°, with F in kN and x in cm. Find
the energy stored in the ligament when it’s been stretched (a) 7.5
cm and (b) 15 cm. A 200-g block slides back and forth on a
frictionless surface between two springs, as shown in Fig. 7.18. The
left-hand spring has k = 130 N/m and its maximum compression is
16 cm. The right-hand spring has k = 280 N/m. Find (a) the FIGURE
7.18 Problem 45 Force (kN) 5a S in FIGURE 7.17 Problem 44
maximum compression of the right-hand spring and (b) the speed of
the block as it moves between the springs. Automotive standards
call for bumpers that sustain essentially no damage in a 4-km/h
collision with a stationary object. As an automotive engineer, you’d
like to improve on that. You’ve developed a spring-mounted bumper
with effective spring constant 1.3 MN/m. The springs can compress
up to 5.0 cm before damage occurs. For a 1400-kg car, what do you
claim as the maximum collision speed?
 132 Chapter 7 Conservation of Energy 47. CH 48. 49. 50.
D1; 52. CH 53. 54. ENV 32: 56. A block slides on the frictionless
loop-the-loop track shown in Fig. 7.19. Find the minimum height h at
which it can start from rest and still make it around the loop.
FIGURE 7.19 Problem 47 The maximum speed of the pendulum bob
in a grandfather clock is 0.55 m/s. If the pendulum makes a
maximum angle of 8.0° with the vertical, what’s the pendulum’s
length? A mass m is dropped from height h above the top of a
spring of constant k mounted vertically on the floor. Show that the
spring’s maximum compression is given by (mg/k)(1 + V1 +
2kh/mg). A particle with total energy 3.5 J is trapped in a potential
well described by U = 7.0 — 8.0x + 1.7x’, where U is in joules and x
in meters. Find its turning points. (a) Derive an expression for the
potential energy of an object subject to a force F, = ax* + bx®
where a = —26.5 N/m’, b = 12.2 N/m’, and x is in meters. Take U =
0 at x = 0. (b) Plot the potential energy as a function of position on
the interval 0 < x < 3m, and (c) determine graphically the locations
of the turning points for an object whose total energy is —10.0 J. In
ionic solids such as NaCl (salt), the potential energy of a pair of ions
takes the form U = b/r" — alr, where r is the separation of the ions.
For NaCl, a and b have the SI values 4.04 x 10778 and 5.52X 10 °8,
respectively, and n = 8.22. Find the equilibrium separation in NaCl.
Repeat Exercise 17 for the case when the coefficient of kinetic
friction on both slopes is 0.11, while the level stretches remain
frictionless. As an energy-efficiency consultant, you’re asked to
assess a pumped-storage facility. Its reservoir sits 140 m above its
generating station and holds 8.5X10° kg of water. The power plant
generates 330 MW of electric power while draining the reservoir over
an 8.0-h period. Its efficiency is the percentage of the stored
potential energy that gets converted to electricity. What efficiency do
you report? A spring of constant k = 340 N/m is used to launch a
1.5-kg block along a horizontal surface whose coefficient of sliding
friction is 0.27. If the spring is compressed 18 cm, how far does the
block slide? A bug slides back and forth in a bowl 15 cm deep,
starting from rest at the top, as shown in Fig. 7.20. The bow] is
frictionless except for a 1.4-cm-wide sticky patch on its flat bottom,
where the coefficient of friction is 0.89. How many times does the
bug cross the sticky region? 15cm FIGURE 7.20 Problem 56 Ds CH
58. 59. CH 60. 61. 62. CH 63. 64. CH A 190-g block is launched by
compressing a spring of constant k = 200 N/m by 15 cm. The spring
is mounted horizontally, and the surface directly under it is
frictionless. But beyond the equilibrium position of the spring end,
the surface has frictional coefficient = 0.27. This frictional surface
extends 85 cm, followed by a frictionless curved rise, as shown in
Fig. 7.21. After it’s launched, where does the block finally come to
rest? Measure from the left end of the frictional zone. Me pw = 0.27
Frictionless Frictionless FIGURE 7.21 Problem 57 In 2017 Hurricane
Maria dumped nearly 20" of rain on Puerto Rico. Give an order-of-
magnitude estimate for the change in potential energy of all this rain
as it fell from the hurricane. An 840-kg roller-coaster car is launched
from a giant spring with k = 31 kN/m into a frictionless loop-the-
loop track of radius 6.2 m, as shown in Fig. 7.22. What’s the
minimum spring compression that will ensure the car stays on the
track? FIGURE 7.22 Problem 59 A particle slides back and forth on a
frictionless parabolic track whose height is given by h = ax”, where x
is the horizontal coordinate. Find an expression for the position x of
the turning points of an object sliding on this track, if its speed at
the bottom is v. A child sleds down a frictionless hill whose vertical
drop is 7.2 m. At the bottom is a level but rough stretch where the
coefficient of kinetic friction is 0.51. How far does she slide across
the level stretch? A bug lands on top of the frictionless, spherical
head of a bald man. It begins to slide down his head (Fig. 7.23).
Show that the bug leaves the head when it has dropped a vertical
distance onethird of the head’s radius. FIGURE 7.23 Problem 62 A
particle of mass m is subject to a force F = (aVx) 7, where ais
aconstant. The particle is initially at rest at the origin and is given a
slight nudge in the positive x-direction. Find an expression for its
speed as a function of position x. A block of weight 4.5 N is launched
up a 30° inclined plane 2.0 m long by a spring with k = 2.0 kN/m
and maximum compression 10 cm. The coefficient of kinetic friction
is 0.50. Does
 the block reach the top of the incline? If so, how much
kinetic energy does it have there? If not, how close to the top, along
the incline, does it get? 65. Your engineering department is asked to
evaluate the performance of a new 370-hp sports car. You know that
27% of the engine’s power can be converted to kinetic energy of the
1200kg car, and that the power delivered is independent of the car’s
velocity. What do you report for the time it will take to accelerate
from rest to 60 mi/h on a level road? 66. Your roommate is writing a
science fiction novel and asks your advice about a plot point. Her
characters are mining ore on the Moon and launching it toward
Earth. Bins with 1500 kg of ore will be launched by a large spring, to
be compressed 17 m. It takes a speed of 2.4 km/s to escape the
Moon’s gravity. What do you tell her is an appropriate spring
constant? 67. You have a summer job at your university’s zoology
department, where you'll be working with an animal behavior expert.
She’s assigned you to study videos of different animals leaping into
the air. Your task is to compare their power outputs as they jump.
You’ll have the mass m of each animal from data collected in the
field. From the videos, you’ll be able to measure both the vertical
distance d over which the animal accelerates when it pushes off the
ground and the maximum height / it reaches. Your task is to find an
algebraic expression for power in terms of these parameters. 68.
Biomechanical engineers developing artificial limbs for proscH thetic
and robotic applications have developed a two-spring design for their
replacement Achilles tendon. The first spring has constant k and the
second ak, where a > 1. When the artificial tendon is stretched from
x = 0 to x = x), only the first spring is engaged. For x > x,, a
mechanism engages the second spring, giving a configuration like
that described in part (a) of Chapter 4’s Problem 65. Find an
expression for the energy stored in the artificial tendon when it’s
stretched a distance 2x). 69. Blocks with different masses are
pushed against a spring one at DATA a time, compressing it different
amounts. Each is then launched onto an essentially frictionless
horizontal surface that then curves upward, still frictionless (like Fig.
7.21 but without the frictional part). The table below shows the
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookfinal.com