Asteroid falling to earth, what will be minimum speed and KE on planet?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the minimum speed and kinetic energy of a 20,000-kg asteroid falling to Earth from a great distance, ignoring atmospheric effects. Participants emphasize using calculus to derive the gravitational force, which is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from Earth's center. The conversation highlights the use of the work-energy principle, specifically integrating the gravitational force to find kinetic energy at impact. There is a focus on avoiding the gravitational constant (G) to simplify the problem, using relationships derived from basic physics principles instead. The approach aims to calculate the kinetic energy as the asteroid reaches the Earth's surface, confirming that the force approaches zero at large distances.
overdrive7
Messages
11
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The gravitational pull of the Earth on an object is inversely proportional to the square of the distance of the object from the center of the earth. At the Earth's surface this force is equal to the object's normal weight mg, where g = 9.8m/s^2, and at large distances, the force is zero. If a 20,000-kg asteroid falls to Earth from a very great distance away, what will be its minimum speed as it strikes the Earth's surface, and how much kinetic energy will it impart to our planet? You can ignore the effects of the Earth's atmosphere


Homework Equations


K=(1/2)(mv2)
g=~1/r^2, where r is the distance from the center of Earth to the asteroid
W=∫Fxdx

The Attempt at a Solution


I've seen a solution where the equation for potential energy (U) is involved, but it seems I'm supposed to solve this using calculus. I'm not quite sure where to start. I'm trying to use the integral of the work formula, but I'm not sure how to relate it to this problem where the gravity is involved. Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm glad to see you doing this, Overdrive. One should do it from basics until it gets boring, then use those more powerful formulas.

W=∫Fr*dr should do the trick. Your F will just be the big G formula for gravitational force. Show your work here if you want a check or help!
 
Delphi51 said:
I'm glad to see you doing this, Overdrive. One should do it from basics until it gets boring, then use those more powerful formulas.

W=∫Fr*dr should do the trick. Your F will just be the big G formula for gravitational force. Show your work here if you want a check or help!

Thank you for the reply. By "big G formula", are you referring to the Gm1m2/r^2 formula? If so, is there a way to do it without the big G? I don't think I'm supposed to use the gravitational constant, because that is chapters away from where we are right now in our textbook (ch13 vs ch6).
 
Yes, that is the formula I meant.
The gravitational pull of the Earth on an object is inversely proportional to the square of the distance of the object from the center of the earth. At the Earth's surface this force is equal to the object's normal weight mg, where g = 9.8m/s^2
Could this be suggesting you derive that formula?
F proportional to 1/r² means F = k/r²
At the surface of the Earth this is mg = k/R² where R is the radius of Earth, so k = mgR²
and so F = k*r² becomes F = (mgR²)/r²
(Hopefully this mgR² has the same value as G*m*M.)
It does neatly avoid using G.
 
Thank you! I will use that and find the integral from infinity to the surface of the earth, since it says "at large distances, the force is 0", so the infinity would cancel out and leave the KE when it hits the surface.. I hope that's correct.
 
Sounds good!
 
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 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
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