About gravitational binding energy and kinetic energy

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between gravitational binding energy (GBE) and kinetic energy (KE) of celestial bodies, specifically focusing on whether a significant increase in the Moon's kinetic energy could lead to its disintegration or escape from Earth's gravitational influence. Participants explore theoretical implications, definitions, and the conditions under which these energies are measured.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions if the Moon would break apart if its kinetic energy exceeded its gravitational binding energy, suggesting a hypothetical acceleration to 100,000 meters per second.
  • Another participant emphasizes that kinetic energy is frame-dependent, implying that the original poster may misunderstand its absolute nature.
  • Some participants argue that while energy in a closed system is conserved, kinetic energy is not conserved in all reference frames, highlighting the importance of specifying the frame of reference when discussing energy.
  • A participant points out that increasing the Moon's kinetic energy sufficiently could lead to it exceeding escape velocity, thus unbinding it from Earth's gravitational pull.
  • There is a discussion about the necessity of uniform force application to prevent the Moon from breaking apart during acceleration, with some suggesting that non-uniform acceleration could lead to fragmentation.
  • Another participant raises the idea that the mention of 'strain' in the original post may indicate a misunderstanding of the relationship between kinetic energy and binding energy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of kinetic energy and gravitational binding energy, with no consensus reached on whether the Moon would break apart or escape under the proposed conditions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of energy conservation and the effects of acceleration.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of clearly defining the frame of reference when discussing kinetic and potential energy, as well as the need for precise conditions under which hypothetical scenarios are considered.

GabrielLight
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
If a celestial body's kinetic energy (say, the Moon's) surpassed the energy necessary to exceed the gravitational binding energy (GBE), would said body break apart because of it?

For example, the Moon is currently orbiting the Earth at a speed of 1020 meters per second, giving it a kinetic energy of roughly 3.8e28 joules. Its gravitational binding energy is approximately 1.24e29 joules. If it suddenly (and somehow) accelerated to 100,000 meters per second, grossly exceeding its gravitational binding energy, would it break apart or anything from the strain?

Thanks in advance.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Uh ... I think you need to go back to the basic definition of kinetic energy, since you seem to think it has an absolute value. Hint: It's frame dependent.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the kinetic energy that is conserved non-reference frame dependent?
 
GabrielLight said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the kinetic energy that is conserved non-reference frame dependent?
If you pick a frame of reference and stick with it the energy in a closed system is conserved. (1) That doesn't mean that kinetic energy is conserved. Think of an apple falling to the ground. It has kinetic energy on the way down but if your reference frame is the surface of the Earth, it has zero after it hits the ground. (2) Your original post seems to imply that you think the moon has some specific, absolute, kinetic energy. it doesn't. (3) "If it suddenly (and somehow) accelerated to 100,000 meters per second" is just handwaving magic unless you explain HOW the external force is applied to make that happen. The result of such a force application might well cause the moon to fragment.

You need to be very specific when asking scientific questions, and hand-waving is not allowed.
 
Wouldn't speeding it up make the moon escape from the earth?
 
GabrielLight said:
For example, the Moon is currently orbiting the Earth at a speed of 1020 meters per second...

Look up how fast the solar system is moving around the galaxy.
 
mathman said:
Wouldn't speeding it up make the moon escape from the earth?
Depends how much you speed it up.
 
GabrielLight said:
For example, the Moon is currently orbiting the Earth at a speed of 1020 meters per second, giving it a kinetic energy of roughly 3.8e28 joules. Its gravitational binding energy is approximately 1.24e29 joules. If it suddenly (and somehow) accelerated to 100,000 meters per second, grossly exceeding its gravitational binding energy, would it break apart or anything from the strain?
When talking about binding energy of astronomical objects, you're talking about supplying enough kinetic energy to some system to bring all of its components outside the gravitational potential well produced by those same components.
This means that you have to be careful to identify which gravitational potential you're overcoming, because only that potential matters.

When you're talking about the Moon in its orbit, the system bound by gravity is the Earth-Moon system.
You're measuring both kinetic and potential energy (i.e. binding energy) of the components of this system w/r to a stationary reference frame of the Earth-Moon barycentre (or Earth's centre, if you're lazy).

Increasing KE of the Moon sufficiently for it to exceed the escape velocity would unbind the system in the sense that the Moon would stop orbiting Earth and fly away.

When you're talking about the binding energy of the Moon itself, the system bound by gravity is all the matter that the Moon is made of - and nothing else.
You're measuring both KE and PE of elements of this system w/r to a stationary reference frame of the centre of mass of the Moon.

The components of this system (all the lunar rocks etc.) don't have any KE energy w/r to the centre of the Moon, apart from whatever comes from its monthly rotation and residual temperature.
In this reference frame, the Moon has zero energy associated with its orbit around Earth. This is, of course, because all components of the Moon orbit the Earth at the same speed, so they're all stationary w/r to each other.

If you wanted to unbind the Moon, you'd have to increase the KE of the particles making up the Moon in the frame of reference associated with its centre of mass.
Spinning it up is one way of doing it. Heating it up is another.
Making the entire Moon go faster w/r to some external body won't achieve anything (unless they then collide).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeterDonis
CWatters said:
Depends how much you speed it up.
I presume it is speeding up enough relevant to the initial question.
 
  • #10
Bandersnatch said:
Making the entire Moon go faster w/r to some external body won't achieve anything (unless they then collide).
Uh ... what do you reckon would happen if you applied enough force to accelerate the moon out of the solar system in a period of, say, 5 seconds? Unless you could apply the force uniformly to every molecule in the moon, it would break apart. That's how I read what the OP is asking about.
 
  • #11
phinds said:
Uh ... what do you reckon would happen if you applied enough force to accelerate the moon out of the solar system in a period of, say, 5 seconds?
1. Why not 58 quintillion seconds? Why non-uniform acceleration instead of uniform? Let's not add content to the question that isn't there.
2. If you did manage to accelerate the entire Moon to the speed specified by the OP, then the application was uniform and/or gradual enough to prevent breaking. If you didn't manage to keep the Moon intact, then it was functionally equivalent to a collision, and you only have bits of the satellite moving at the specified orbital speed. And that's a different setup than what is asked for.

phinds said:
That's how I read what the OP is asking about.
While the mention of 'strain' in the OP might suggest that they're concerned with the method of acceleration breaking apart the Moon, I think it's a red herring. The rest of the post suggests it's just a matter of confusing unrelated quantities (lunar orbital KE and its binding energy), and that they think all that extra energy would cause some strain (because where did it go, eh?).
As you said in your first response, the whole thing smells of a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means for KE to be frame dependent, or not knowing it altogether.
 
  • #12
Bandersnatch said:
While the mention of 'strain' in the OP might suggest that they're concerned with the method of acceleration breaking apart the Moon, I think it's a red herring. The rest of the post suggests it's just a matter of confusing unrelated quantities (lunar orbital KE and its binding energy), and that they think all that extra energy would cause some strain (because where did it go, eh?).
As you said in your first response, the whole thing smells of a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means for KE to be frame dependent, or not knowing it altogether.
Agreed
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 86 ·
3
Replies
86
Views
8K
  • · Replies 138 ·
5
Replies
138
Views
9K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K