Recent content by Rael

  1. R

    Kepler's First Law: Approximation or Exact?

    An ellipse hmmm..., I solved the integral, and winded up with a formula for \theta(r) which in polar coordinates is a conic section. Everythings ok until now, but i have simulated the system of differential equations on my PC and I got the following trajectory ...
  2. R

    Kepler's First Law: Approximation or Exact?

    Still have no idea on how to get rid of that nasty NODE (nonlinear differential equation) :frown: it's nonlinear... i wonder if there exists a time dependent solution for the two body problem... (my problem should be a simplified version of that)...
  3. R

    Kepler's First Law: Approximation or Exact?

    You'r right ! it's an error to consider angular velocity being constant ! Well, angular momentum is derivable from the equation for \ddot{\theta}, so being h the angular momentum we have h = \dot{\theta}r^2 using this in the equation for \ddot{r} we obtain \ddot{r} = \frac{h^2}{r^3}...
  4. R

    Kepler's First Law: Approximation or Exact?

    Eghm, well, since the force is central, angular acceleration is 0. so I have only the equation for radial acceleration left. It's still not linear, but may be more easily solvable. Is it a brutal approximation to consider the term - MG/r^2 = 0 due to the little value of G ?? What exactly do...
  5. R

    Circular orbit in schwarzschild solution

    Eghm ... does it have sense to solve the formula for E, imposing the period to be 17 minutes, and then trying to do some considerations about the values of E found ??
  6. R

    Kepler's First Law: Approximation or Exact?

    Hi folks, my problem is the following one: Kepler stated that orbits of planets are elliptic. Everytnig's well since Newton obtained the same results, with his formula for gravity F = G(mM)/r^2 Now, i tried to write the Lagrangian of the system (L = K-U, K is cinetic energy, U is...
Back
Top