8

I thought this would be a simple question, but I'm having trouble figuring it out. Not a homework assignment btw. I am a physics student and am just genuinely interested in physics problems involving math, which would be all of them.

So lets say we drop an object from a height, $R+r$, it falls toward earth. This height, $R+r$, is far enough away that the $g$ it experiences is a fraction of $g$ at sea-level. Let's just say that air resistance is negligible, and it wouldn't be that complicated to just integrate from $0$ velocity to the terminal velocity piece wise and deal with the rest of it later.

So the key here is that acceleration is changing with time. I thought I could simplify this by saying it changes with distance, and it has nothing to do with time, but this didn't really help, my guess is that maybe time is important (doh).

I tried integrating acceleration with time, and ended up nowhere. I tried integrating $a=GM/R^2$ with respect to $R$ from $R+r$ to $R$ and ended up with a negative function.

I saw somewhere someone tried to expand with taylor series, they even have something similar on hyperphysics, but I can't figure out how to obtain the polynomials that precede the variables.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/images/avari.gif

This is the hyperphysics site where they use polynomials to find the distance. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/avari.html#c1

Maybe I can't solve this because I haven't taken a course in differential equations yet. What I want to know is how to calculate the distance at any time.

Qmechanic
  • 201,751
Kam
  • 93
  • 1
    It would be helpful if you showed some of your work and explained what you were looking for. – DilithiumMatrix May 07 '13 at 05:29
  • Because there is no air resistance this only requires integration (not a differential equation). The non-relativistic equation should be good enough for most situations. – Brandon Enright May 07 '13 at 05:44
  • 1
    the last equation I was working on was this:

    $a=a_0+2/x^3=1/x^2+2/x^3$

    So basically, I discarded the gravitional constant and the mass of earth to simplify things.

    and in fact, even this equation looks wrong to me, because integrating $1/x^2$ should give $-2/x^3$. But I thought that would be silly, I want to add acceleration not subtract it.

    – Kam May 07 '13 at 06:01
  • I understand that the correct way is to follow what hyperphysics was doing, which is expanding as a taylor series, because I saw someone else doing that on this site. But I don't know how to obtain the constants of the series.

    That's why I thought I would need to know differential equations, because I was watching a few videos from mit and I am not sure how to do boundary solutions and things like that.

    For example, wouldnt I have to use a ODE where we take into account the frequency, or something along those lines.

    I guess my original question was silly.

    – Kam May 07 '13 at 06:06
  • 2
    Are you looking for this? (also this) – David Z May 07 '13 at 06:10
  • Yup, Im trying to walk myself through your calculations for the first step. I understand that you used the seperation vector r. I understand that you set the F=ma where a is the twice derivative of r.

    Im confused at how you got to $G(m_1+m_2)$ from the previous equations. Thanks for the information. Ill keep reading till I figure this out.

    – Kam May 07 '13 at 06:30
  • Hi Kamy. See e.g. Wikipedia. Also, if you haven't already done so, please take a minute to read the definition of when to use the homework tag, and the Phys.SE policy for homework-like problems. – Qmechanic May 07 '13 at 07:27

3 Answers3

8

If $h$ is the height about the earth then

$$ \ddot{h} = -\frac{G M}{(R+h)^2} $$

$$ \ddot{h} = \frac{{\rm d} \dot{h}}{{\rm d}t}= \frac{{\rm d} \dot{h}}{{\rm d}h} \frac{{\rm d} h}{{\rm d}t} = \frac{{\rm d} \dot{h}}{{\rm d}h} \dot{h} $$

$$ \int \ddot{h}\; {\rm d} h = \int \dot{h}\; {\rm d} \dot{h} = \frac{1}{2} \dot{h}^2 + K$$

$$ \int -\frac{G M}{(R+h)^2}\; {\rm d} h = \frac{1}{2} \dot{h}^2 + K_1 $$

$$ \frac{G M}{R+h} = \frac{1}{2} \dot{h}^2 + K_1 $$

Given initial velocity of 0 at a height $h_0$ then $K_1=\frac{G M}{R+h_0}$ and

$$ \dot{h} = \sqrt{ \frac{2 G M (h_0-h)}{(R+h)(R+h_0)}} $$ gives the velocity profile as a function of height $h$. The time to distance is

$$ t = \int \frac{1}{\dot{h}}\;{\rm d}h + K_2 $$

which can be expressed as

$$t \sqrt{ \frac{2 G M}{(R+h_0)^3} } = \cos^{-1}\left( \sqrt{ \frac{R+h}{R+h_0}}\right) - \sqrt{ \frac{r+h}{R+h_0} \left( 1 - \frac{R+h}{R+h_0} \right) } $$

A close approximation of the above is

$$ h \approx (R+h_0)\left(1-\left( \frac{9 G M}{2 r_0^3} t^2 \right)^\frac{1}{3} \right) - R $$

John Alexiou
  • 38,341
  • 1
    Would like to add this is only for vertical projection, in general the path is some vector path . For this case: $$\vec{r}(t) = (R_{E} + h(t) ) \hat k $$ $$|\vec{r}(t)| = R_{E} + h(t)$$ $$ \frac{|\vec{dr}|}{dh} = 1$$ $$ |\vec{dr}|= dh $$ Which is why "dr=dh". When the path is not in the above form, but has other vector components, it becomes way more complicated. – jensen paull May 12 '22 at 11:10
8

Why don't you use energy conservation? Since this is a 1-dimensional task in potential field, it will be enough $$ E/m = 0 - \frac{GM}{r(0)} = \frac{v(t)^2}{2} - \frac{GM}{r(t)} $$

For your assumption that the motion is strictly radial and downwards you have $v(t) = dr(t)/dt < 0$ so you can solve for $dr(t)/dt$ and get an ordinary first order differential which can be solved by separating the variables.

xaxa
  • 1,582
  • This is not lagrangian, this is total energy ($E$) = kinetic($mv^2/2$) + potential($-GmM/r$). At $t=0$ you have kinetic energy = 0. You solve this for $v(t)^2$ algebraically, so you have $v(t)^2 = F(r)$. Then you set $v(t) = dr/dt$ and take a minus sign when extracting square root, so you have have $dr/dt = -\sqrt{F(r)}$. Then you just rearrange to get $-dr/\sqrt{F(r)} = dt$ and integrate. On the left you have a function only of $r$, on the right only of $t$. – xaxa May 17 '13 at 09:21
-2

I thought gravity is uniform acceleration, not increasing acceleration..

Position: $y(t) = \frac{1}{2} g t^2$

Velocity: $y'(t) = gt$;

Acceleration: $y''(t) = g$;

Neuneck
  • 9,129
Matt
  • 1
  • 4
    This statement is only true as long as the height above ground is negligible w.r.t. earth's radius. Generally the gravitational force gets weaker with the distance squared to the center of mass of the gravitating object. – Neuneck May 16 '13 at 10:00