Another Planetary Mechanics Question

AI Thread Summary
A NASA spaceship orbits the moon at an altitude of 111 km, prompting a discussion about the time it takes to complete one orbit. The user applied the formula mp=4π²R³/GT², using the moon's mass and radius, and calculated an orbital period of approximately 7120 seconds. There is uncertainty regarding the accuracy of the calculations and the appropriateness of the equation used. Another participant suggests using potential energy to derive angular velocity and period, indicating that the original calculation might be close to correct. Overall, the discussion revolves around confirming the validity of the orbital period calculation and the methods used.
NDiggity
Messages
53
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A NASA spaceship is orbiting the moon at an altitude of 111 km. How long does it take the ship to make one orbit around the moon?

This was a question on the test I had today, just wondering if I'm out to lunch or not. So he gave us all the info on the moon on an overhead. I used the mass of the moon 7.36*10^22 kg and the radius 1,737,000m added to the altitude.

Homework Equations


I used the equation mp=4π²R³/GT²

The Attempt at a Solution


So I plugged in 7.36*10^22=4π²(1848000)³/6.67*10¯¹¹(T²) and solved for t.

I got with sig figs 7120 seconds or something like that on the test. His numbers might have been slightly different. Did I do this completely wrong?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not familiar with the equation that you are using, that is to say that it must be derived from a couple of other equations, but it could be correct.

I would have used potential energy to find the angular velocity, and then the period. Just approximating in my mind, I think you are right or close to right.
 
Alright well thank you for your help. We have not learned about potential energy yet but if you think my answer is in the ballmark, that makes me worry a lot less!
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top