Gravitational Acceleration Help

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around demonstrating the equivalence of two expressions related to gravitational acceleration: GMm (1/r1 - 1/r2) and mgh, particularly when r2 is nearly equal to r1 near the Earth's surface.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between gravitational force and height, with some suggesting approximations based on the assumption that h is much smaller than r1. There are attempts to manipulate the equations to show the equivalence of the two expressions.

Discussion Status

Several participants have provided insights and partial manipulations of the equations. There is an ongoing exploration of how to simplify the expressions and the implications of the assumptions being made. No consensus has been reached, but productive lines of reasoning are being discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the assumption that h is significantly smaller than r1, which influences their approaches to the problem. There is also mention of the radius of the Earth as a key factor in the calculations.

wikidrox
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
I don't understand how to do this question. Please help

Show that GMm (1/r1 - 1/r2) and mgh are, for practical purposes, equal, when r2 is almost equal to r1 near the Earth's surface.

I just don't know how to do it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1.
[tex]g=\frac{GM}{r_{1}^{2}}[/tex], where [tex]r_{1}[/tex] is the radius of the earth.

2. Set [tex]r_{2}=r_{1}+h[/tex], and assume [tex]h<<r_{1}[/tex]

See if these relations might help you..
 
wikidrox said:
I don't understand how to do this question. Please help

Show that GMm (1/r1 - 1/r2) and mgh are, for practical purposes, equal, when r2 is almost equal to r1 near the Earth's surface.

I just don't know how to do it.
Okay, if you're trying to prove that:

[tex]GMm(\frac{1}{r_{1}}\ -\ \frac{1}{r_{2}})\ =\ mgh[/tex]

Notice that you can start by cancelling out "m" from both sides. Also, notice that you can rewrite the stuff in brackets like so:

[tex]GM\frac{r_{2}\ -\ r_{1}}{r_{2}r_{1}}\ =\ gh[/tex]

Now, can you think of a relationship between h, r1, and r2? Also, recognize that r1 is the radius of the Earth. Now, can you use the information from the previous sentence to make an assumption so that you can do something with the r1r2 part?
 
hgfdkl;

I still can get it totally.

here is where I get to:

GM/r1^2 + r1h = g

I can't get rid of the r1h.
 
Let's do this as follows:

1. You are to approximate:
[tex]GMm(\frac{1}{r_{1}}-\frac{1}{r_{1}+h})[/tex]

2. You know the following:
[tex]\frac{GM}{r_{1}^{2}}=g,h<<r_{1}[/tex]

3. Bring the difference in 1. together like this:
[tex]GMm(\frac{1}{r_{1}}-\frac{1}{r_{1}+h})=GMm(\frac{r_{1}+h-r_{1}}{r_{1}(r_{1}+h)})=[/tex]
[tex]m\frac{GM}{r_{1}^{2}}\frac{h}{1+\frac{h}{r_{1}}}=\frac{mgh}{1+\frac{h}{r_{1}}}[/tex]

4.
Now, by 2:
[tex]h<<r_{1}\to\frac{h}{r_{1}}<<1[/tex]

The fraction in the denominator is seen to be much less than 1, and therefore we have the approximate equality:
[tex]\frac{mgh}{1+\frac{h}{r_{1}}}\approx{mgh}[/tex]
 
Then there's always a series expansion :biggrin:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K