Talk:Gravitational energy

message: The Energy Navbar has been removed because it focuses upon industrial energy subjects.  Until gravitational energy is harnessed, it is not appropriate to add it to this Navbar.  If it is not on the Navbar, then the Navbar does not belong in the article. – Paine (Climax!)  05:52, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: shut up 4.14.64.202 (talk) 17:26, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navbar 

message: The english is sloppy in this section I do not believe that the physics in this section is correct either. I am going to come back to look at this page later to sort it out.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.124.129.66 (talk) 23:49, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newtonian Mechanics 

message: The introduction has to be completely rewritten, removing the confusing example of Quasars which is a very specific example which not should be explained in detail in the introduction of an encyclopedic article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vahandr (talk • contribs) 21:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: I believe your edit here permits us to remove .  Do you agree?--Guy vandegrift (talk) 17:46, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I'm the one who added the template, as I thought it would be a good idea for someone to go over this article and fact-check. If you've done so then feel free to remove it. Cheers, Laurdecl talk 05:56, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked it over an realized that there are indeed difficulties.  It is a mixture of a very simple calculation, namely the gravitational interaction between two Newtonian point masses, and a discussion that requires a true expert, namely gravitational potential energy associated with general relativity.  My knowledge of general relativity is insufficient, but I remember that the concept cannot be properly defined in a simple way.  I think the template needs to stand.  I stumbled upon this because the "easy" calculation arises in first year physics.  Students can and should copy this into Wikiversity reports.  Meanwhile, I think your template should probably stay (unless others want to get into this).  Thanks for your edits, they did improve the article.  --Guy vandegrift (talk) 00:16, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of "Expert needed" template 

message: I believe this article is to theoretic, specially i believe the section on general relativity is misplaced. As i understand general relativity, it is only applicable at wery high speed, (near the speed of light) that is not the kind of speed I would expect in a practical contruction.
I would also suggest the first part include a practical approuch, so you can calculate the power generatet by a falling body. As I believe, it is the entire purpose of the matter.
This is my first post on wiki, so I hope I do things right. (I belive I do not have the right to edit the article.)
Stabiw (talk) 13:57, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  General relativity 

message: In the lead section, this article claims that near Earth's surface in a uniform gravitational field, gravitational potential energy can be written  U = mgh. This equation should be backed up in the article with a derivation. The basic steps of the derivation posted by DrPippy are supported here and here, with some minor algebraic differences. Perhaps the derivation could be changed to more accurately reflect the source material, but the ideas are correct. Humsorgan (talk) 00:44, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gravitational Energy near Earth's Surface Derivation 

message: Why does the gravitational energy increase when the points are further apart, when you're dividing with the radius? Wikifan153 (talk) 08:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formula