Deriving Orbital Period with Kepler's & Taylor Expansions

Yes, except as I noted before you forgot to take the square root of P(R_e) in your first equation for P(h+R_e).
  • #1
ArbazAlam
10
0

Homework Statement



Use Kepler's Third Law and a Taylor expansion to derive the following approximation for the orbital period of a satellite in low Earth orbit with a constant height h above the surface of the Earth. h << R_earth :

[tex]P \approx P_{0}(1+3h/2R_{e})[/tex]

Homework Equations



Kepler's Third Law:

[tex]P^{2}=4\pi^{2}r^{3}/GM[/tex]

Taylor Expansion:

[tex]f(x)=\sum^{\infty}_{n=0}f^{n}(x-a)/n![/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



I'm pretty certain my professor doesn't want us to expand the Taylor series beyond the first degree. I tried to write Kepler's Third Law in terms of just P and then write out the Taylor expansion about 0 (McLaurin series), but all terms came out to 0. I'm not 100% sure where to go beyond the definitions of Kepler's Law and the Taylor expansion.

I'm also confused why, if we are assuming h<<R_e, the variable h is even necessary.

I'm not asking for a solution, but any hints are much appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2


How are you going to get a square root in a Taylor expansion? Think about it.

(Note: That is a hint, not a question re the validity of the problem.)
 
  • #3


Doesn't the original function have to have a root to begin with?
 
  • #4


So? The Taylor expansion of

[tex]f(x) = \sqrt(1+x)[/tex]

about x=0 is

[tex]f(x) = 1+\frac 1 2 x - \frac 1 8 x^2 + \frac 1 {16} x^3 - \frac 5 {128} x^4 + \cdots[/tex]

Note: There is no square root in the expansion. Truncating a Taylor expansion yields a polynomial. How do you go from a polynomial to a square root?

I'll let you think about it for a bit but will give you a more direct hint in the next post if you can't see how to go forward.
 
  • #5


I made a dumb mistake. There is no root in the period approximation and I edited accordingly.

D H, I'm afraid I still don't understand. :( Thank you for bearing with me.
 
  • #6


In the previous version of the problem you would have computed a truncated Taylor expansion of the square of the period and then taken the square root at the end.

This new form is even easier. Just do a Taylor expansion of the period, truncate to the linear term, and you are done. The problem pretty much tells you what to do a Taylor expansion about.

Do you understand the basic concept of how to compute a Taylor expansion?
 
  • #7


Yes, I can compute a Taylor expansion like the example you presented.

So in this problem, I take f(h) = P^2 and then compute the Taylor series for f(h) about R_e [to n=1]. Once I do that, I can take the square root of the polynomial. Is this correct?
 
  • #8


No, you take f(h) = P. Taking f(h)=P2 will lead you to a different approximation, one that involves a square root. There is no square root in the edited version of the problem.
 
  • #9


Sweet! Finally got it. Here is how I got it for future reference.

I took the Taylor series of P(h+R_e) about R_e and got:

[tex]P\approx 2\pi R_{e}\sqrt{(h+R_{e})/(GM)}(1+(3h)/(2R_{e}))[/tex]The next question asks what the value of P_0 is. I take that to be:

[tex]P_{0}=2\pi R_{e}\sqrt{(h+R_{e})/(GM)}[/tex]

The units work out and everything. :biggrin: Thanks a million, D H! If this forum had a reputation system, I'd give you tons.
 
  • #10


Almost.

The Taylor expansion of some point f(x) about some point x0 is

[tex]f(x) = f(x_0) + (x-x_0)\frac {df}{dx}\Bigr|_{x=x_0} + \cdots[/tex]

So what is this reference point in this problem? You are given height above the surface h, so the reference point is the Earth's surface. P0 is the period for an object that would orbit the right fractions of inches above the surface were it not for pesky big things like Mt. Everest and pesky little things like the atmosphere.

And thanks for the kudos.
 
  • #11


Ok, so:

[tex]P(R_{e})=2 \pi \sqrt{R_{e}^{3}/(GM)} = P_{0}[/tex]

[tex]P'(R_{e})=3 \pi \sqrt{R_{e}/(GM)}[/tex]

So,

[tex]P(h+R_{e}) \approx P(R_{e}) + P'(R_{e})(h) = 2 \pi \sqrt{R_{e}^{3}/(GM)}(1+(3h)/(2R_{e})) = P_{0}[1+(3h)/(2R_{e})][/tex]
 
Last edited:

FAQ: Deriving Orbital Period with Kepler's & Taylor Expansions

1. What is Kepler's Second Law and how is it related to orbital period?

Kepler's Second Law states that the line connecting a planet to the sun sweeps out equal areas in equal times. This means that as a planet moves around its elliptical orbit, it will cover the same amount of area in the same amount of time, regardless of its distance from the sun. This is directly related to orbital period because it means that a planet will move faster when it is closer to the sun and slower when it is farther away, resulting in a consistent orbital period.

2. What is Taylor Expansion and how is it used in deriving orbital period?

Taylor Expansion is a mathematical technique used to approximate a complicated function with a simpler one. In the case of deriving orbital period, Taylor Expansion is used to approximate the force of gravity between two objects as a function of their distance. This allows us to simplify the equations used to calculate orbital period and make them more manageable.

3. How does the mass of the central object affect the orbital period?

The mass of the central object has a direct impact on the orbital period. According to Kepler's Third Law, the orbital period is directly proportional to the cube of the semi-major axis of the orbit (the distance between the two objects). This means that a larger central object will have a stronger gravitational pull, resulting in a shorter orbital period.

4. Can orbital period be calculated for objects other than planets orbiting a star?

Yes, the concept of orbital period can be applied to any two objects in orbit around each other, regardless of their size or composition. For example, orbital period can be calculated for moons orbiting planets, or even artificial satellites orbiting Earth. As long as there is a gravitational force between two objects, their orbital period can be determined.

5. Is Kepler's Second Law always accurate in determining orbital period?

While Kepler's Second Law is accurate in predicting the orbital period of objects in elliptical orbits, it is only an approximation and does not take into account external factors such as the gravitational pull of other objects or changes in the orbit over time. For more precise calculations, other factors must be considered, such as perturbations in the orbit and relativistic effects.

Similar threads

Back
Top