Calculating Escape Velocity on the Equator: Is It Possible?

AI Thread Summary
Escape velocity is influenced by geographic coordinates, particularly due to the Earth's shape, which causes the distance from the surface to the center to vary with latitude. The conservation of energy principle indicates that an object must have sufficient kinetic energy to overcome gravitational potential energy to escape Earth's influence. The discussion clarifies that while the object's initial kinetic energy includes contributions from Earth's rotation, escape velocity itself is a specific threshold that must be reached, independent of any additional kinetic energy from rotation. The calculations presented initially were critiqued for incorrectly assuming the object was in a circular orbit. Understanding these nuances is essential for accurately calculating escape velocity.
blost
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
hello... I've got some small problem with Escape velocity. So... is it dependent on geographic coordinate ? I suppose "Yes!"... but is it true?

Using conservation of energy, I calculate this velocity on equator this way:

\frac{mv^2}{2}= \frac{GMm}{R} - \frac{m(2 \pi R)^2}{T^2*R }
Am I right ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
blost said:
hello... I've got some small problem with Escape velocity. So... is it dependent on geographic coordinate ? I suppose "Yes!"... but is it true?

Using conservation of energy, I calculate this velocity on equator this way:

\frac{mv^2}{2}= \frac{GMm}{R} - \frac{m(2 \pi R)^2}{T^2*R }
Am I right ?
Are you trying to take into account the speed of the escaping object when it is sitting on the earth? Why?

To escape the earth, the object has to have enough kinetic energy so that its total energy (kinetic + potential) is greater than 0.

Condition for escape: KE + PE > 0.

AM
 
blost said:
hello... I've got some small problem with Escape velocity. So... is it dependent on geographic coordinate ? I suppose "Yes!"... but is it true?

Using conservation of energy, I calculate this velocity on equator this way:

\frac{mv^2}{2}= \frac{GMm}{R} - \frac{m(2 \pi R)^2}{T^2*R }
Am I right ?

You've assumed that your escaping mass is locked in a circular orbit around the earth, that is completely incorrect.
I also don't think you're comparing any actual energies of the object. What two states are you comparing? Try and compare the state where it's released from the surface of the earth, and the one when it has escaped it (It is no longer influenced by Earth's gravitational field, what does that mean energy-wise?)

Read Andrew Mason's pointers, they should help you get started, and you should then see whether the solution depends on your initial position or not.
 
Last edited:
I know that KE+Pe>0.
And I know that escaping mass isn't locked in a circular orbit around the earth, but it's still got a kinetic energy from Earth rotation, so i don't know, is Kinetic energy a sum of kinetic energy of Earth rotation and energy which must be inserted to this object?
 
blost said:
I know that KE+Pe>0.
And I know that escaping mass isn't locked in a circular orbit around the earth, but it's still got a kinetic energy from Earth rotation, so i don't know, is Kinetic energy a sum of kinetic energy of Earth rotation and energy which must be inserted to this object?
Yes, of course. But the question asks for the escape velocity, not the velocity or energy that you must add in order to achieve the escape velocity.

The reason the equator is important in this question is this: the distance from the Earth's surface to the centre varies with latitude. It is greatest at the equator.

AM
 
Andrew Mason said:
Yes, of course. But the question asks for the escape velocity, not the velocity or energy that you must add in order to achieve the escape velocity.

thanks. Now i know...

by the way... sorry for my not-recherche language. English is not my native language (I'm 17 from Poland-3 h eng for a week ;/ 37 people in my class ;/ as like Cambodia... ), so please be tolerate :)
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'A bead-mass oscillatory system problem'
I can't figure out how to find the velocity of the particle at 37 degrees. Basically the bead moves with velocity towards right let's call it v1. The particle moves with some velocity v2. In frame of the bead, the particle is performing circular motion. So v of particle wrt bead would be perpendicular to the string. But how would I find the velocity of particle in ground frame? I tried using vectors to figure it out and the angle is coming out to be extremely long. One equation is by work...
Back
Top