Potential & Kinetic Energy of Revolving Object (e.g. Moon)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the gravitational potential and kinetic energy of the Moon as it orbits Earth. The gravitational potential energy of the Moon is expressed as E = -MmG/r, indicating it is negative and that the Moon is bound to Earth. The total energy of the Moon, combining both potential and kinetic energy, is negative, meaning additional energy is required to remove it from Earth's gravitational influence. It is noted that only half of the potential energy is needed to remove the Moon, as the other half is already accounted for by its kinetic energy. The energy required to remove the Moon is estimated to be around 4 x 10^28 Joules, highlighting the immense energy involved in such a scenario.
nishantve1
Messages
74
Reaction score
1
So let's consider the moon its rotating around the Earth in a fixed orbit, its moving at a velocity say v so it possesses a kinetic energy 1/2 mv2 . the gravitational force between the Earth and the moon is also present which attracts the moon towards the Earth . My question is does the moon has a gravitational potential energy of mg where m is the mass of the moon and g is the value of gravitational acceleration in the space ? What role does this potential energy play, the kinetic energy keeps the moon moving and the centripetal force mv2/r keeps it in its orbit . So where does potential energy blends in ? Is this energy responsible for keeping the moon bounded to the Earth ? If not then what energy keeps the moon bounded to Earth ?
Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org


My question is does the moon has a gravitational potential energy of mg where m is the mass of the moon and g is the value of gravitational acceleration in the space ?
No, that formula works for small height differences only, where the variation of g is negligible (e.g. in your lab).

For satellites like the moon, the gravitational potential energy is given by ##E=- \frac{MmG}{r}## where M is the mass of earth, m is the mass of moon, r is the distance and G is the gravitational constant.
It is negative, indicating that the moon is attracted to earth. Moon is bound because the sum of potential energy and kinetic energy is negative (more specific: the kinetic energy is half the (negative) potential energy): You would need additional energy to remove the moon from earth.
 
mfb said:
Moon is bound because the sum of potential energy and kinetic energy is negative (more specific: the kinetic energy is half the (negative) potential energy): You would need additional energy to remove the moon from earth.
So if I use energy equal to the potential energy , will I be able to remove the moon?(Sounds like some evil plan LOL)also if I consider potential energy to be 0 how would it affect the energy required to remove the moon?
 


You just need 50% of the potential energy to remove moon, as the other 50% are already there (as kinetic energy).

also if I consider potential energy to be 0 how would it affect the energy required to remove the moon?
The moon does not care about your choice of potential energy. It is convenient to set "potential energy at infinite distance" to 0, but you can use every other value, too.
 
mfb said:
You just need 50% of the potential energy to remove moon, as the other 50% are already there (as kinetic energy).
.

Cannot understand this , would mind explaining it once?
 


Gravitational binding energy of the moon: GMm/r = -8*1028J
Kinetic energy of the moon: 1/2mv^2 = 4*1028J (rough approximations)

Total energy of the moon: -4*1028J

Minimal energy of the moon at "infinite" distance: 0

Required energy to remove moon: 0 - (-4*1028J) = 4*1028J
(This is about 108 times the world energy consumption of a year)

The actual value is a bit smaller than that, as I did not take the sun into account - you don't have to move it to "infinite" distance, something like ~1.5 million km would be enough to separate it.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top