MHB Calculating Acceleration on the Surface of Venus

AI Thread Summary
To calculate the acceleration due to gravity on Venus, the mass of Venus is determined to be 4.86×10^24 kg, which is 81.5% of Earth's mass, and its radius is 6.05×10^6 m, representing 94.9% of Earth's radius. The formula for gravity on Venus is derived as g' = GM_V/R_V^2, leading to the conclusion that g' can be expressed in relation to Earth's gravity. Using Earth's gravity value of 9.81 m/s², the final calculation yields an acceleration of approximately 8.87 m/s² on Venus. Additionally, a rock weighing 75.0 N on Earth would weigh about 62.5 N on Venus due to the difference in gravitational acceleration.
SantiagoHill
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Friends, hello everyone!
Please help with this calculation.

The mass of Venus is 81.5% that of the earth, and its radius is 94.9% that of the earth.
(a) Compute the acceleration due to gravity on the surface of Venus from these data.
(b) If a rock weighs 75.0 N on earth, what would it weigh at the surface of Venuse?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
SantiagoHill said:
Friends, hello everyone!
Please help with this calculation.

The mass of Venus is 81.5% that of the earth, and its radius is 94.9% that of the earth.
(a) Compute the acceleration due to gravity on the surface of Venus from these data.
(b) If a rock weighs 75.0 N on earth, what would it weigh at the surface of Venuse?
a) You probably already have a formula for g' (the acceleration due to gravity) but here is the derivation anyway:
[math]F = \dfrac{GMm}{R^2} = m g'[/math]

[math]g' = \dfrac{GM}{R^2}[/math]

So if the mass of Venus is [math]M = 0.815 M_E[/math] and [math]R = 0.949 R_E[/math] then what is g'?

b) On Earth w = mg. So find m. On Venus w' = mg'...

-Dan
 
a) The mass of Venus MV represent 81.5% of the of the Earth. So, the mass of Venus is
MV=(81.5%)ME
(1)
Where ME is the mass of the Earth. Plug the mass of Earth into equation (1), so we can get MV by
MV=(0.815)ME=(0.815)(5.97×1024kg)=4.86×1024kg
The radius of Venus represent 94.9% of the radius of the Earth. So, the radius of Venus is
RV=(94.9%)RE
(2)
Where RE is the radius of the Earth. Plug the radius of Earth into equation (2), so we can get RV by
RV=(0.949)(6.38×106m)=6.05×106m
The weight w of a body is the total gravitational force exerted on it by all other bodies in the univerce where this gravitational force F is given by Newton`s general law of gravity by
F=GMVmRV2
(3)
Where RV is the radius of Venus, m is the mass of the body. As we mentioned above, this gravitational force equals the weight of the body which is mg, so using equation (3) we get the acceleration on Venus by
mg=GMVmRV2
gv=GMVRV2
(4)
Now, we plug values for RV, MV and G into equation (4) to get gv
gv=GMVRV2
=(6.67×10−11N⋅m2÷kg2)(4.86×1024kg)(6.05×106m)2
 
WestleyColeman said:
a) The mass of Venus MV represent 81.5% of the of the Earth. So, the mass of Venus is
MV=(81.5%)ME
(1)
Where ME is the mass of the Earth. Plug the mass of Earth into equation (1), so we can get MV by
MV=(0.815)ME=(0.815)(5.97×1024kg)=4.86×1024kg
The radius of Venus represent 94.9% of the radius of the Earth. So, the radius of Venus is
RV=(94.9%)RE
(2)
Where RE is the radius of the Earth. Plug the radius of Earth into equation (2), so we can get RV by
RV=(0.949)(6.38×106m)=6.05×106m
The weight w of a body is the total gravitational force exerted on it by all other bodies in the univerce where this gravitational force F is given by Newton`s general law of gravity by
F=GMVmRV2
(3)
Where RV is the radius of Venus, m is the mass of the body. As we mentioned above, this gravitational force equals the weight of the body which is mg, so using equation (3) we get the acceleration on Venus by
mg=GMVmRV2
gv=GMVRV2
(4)
Now, we plug values for RV, MV and G into equation (4) to get gv
gv=GMVRV2
=(6.67×10−11N⋅m2÷kg2)(4.86×1024kg)(6.05×106m)2
You are missing some division operators but otherwise correct.

Here's a bit of a shortcut.

Define [math]g' = \dfrac{GM_V}{R_V^2}[/math] and [math]g = \dfrac{GM_E}{R_E^2}[/math]. We know that [math]M_V = 0.815 M_E[/math] and [math]R_V = 0.949 R_E[/math]. Then
[math]g' = \dfrac{GM_V}{R_V^2} = \dfrac{G (0.815 M_E)}{(0.949 R_E)^2} = \dfrac{0.815}{0.949^2} \dfrac{G M_E}{R_E^2} = \dfrac{0.815}{0.949^2} \cdot g[/math]
and now you can use g = 9.81 m/s^2.

-Dan
 
topsquark said:
You are missing some division operators but otherwise correct.

Here's a bit of a shortcut.

Define [math]g' = \dfrac{GM_V}{R_V^2}[/math] and [math]g = \dfrac{GM_E}{R_E^2}[/math]. We know that [math]M_V = 0.815 M_E[/math] and [math]R_V = 0.949 R_E[/math]. Then
[math]g' = \dfrac{GM_V}{R_V^2} = \dfrac{G (0.815 M_E)}{(0.949 R_E)^2} = \dfrac{0.815}{0.949^2} \dfrac{G M_E}{R_E^2} = \dfrac{0.815}{0.949^2} \cdot g[/math]
and now you can use g = 9.81 m/s^2.

In order to get a better and more complete explanation of the solution of this problem, I advise you to go to https://plainmath.net/38641/the-mas...-the-earth-and-its-radius-is-94-9%-that-of-th and read the information here. In addition, you can find other useful information here.

Thanks for the advice.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top