Average acceleration and total acceleration of gravity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the time it takes for a smaller mass to fall to the surface of a larger spherical mass under gravitational influence, where the acceleration is not constant. The gravitational force is expressed as F = GMm/r², leading to a differential equation for the motion of the smaller mass. The participants suggest using integration techniques to derive the time function t(r) and emphasize that the average force over distance does not equate to average acceleration. Instead, they recommend calculating work through integration to find the necessary parameters. The conversation highlights the complexity of solving the problem and the importance of understanding the underlying physics.
Nick Heller
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Say you have a gravitational acceleration between a spherical object of mass M and inner radius R and a much smaller spherical object of mass m (essentially point-like) and distance ro away (M >> m) with an acceleration on mass m at any point r given by
a = GM/r2
Knowing that the acceleration with respect to the distance between the two objects is not constant, how would you calculate the amount of time it would take for the object to hit the surface of the larger sphere (also assuming the larger sphere moves negligibly)? The smaller object moves from a distance ro away from the center of mass of the larger object (r = 0) to a distance R away from this center.
Solving this as a differential equation has gotten hairy. My other approach was to take the average force with respect to the distance from the center given by (the definite integral from ro to R of Fdr)/(R - ro) where F is the standard gravitational force. This comes from the equation for the average of any function. Once this average force is calculated, the acceleration is constant, so can it be inserted into the regular kinematic constant-acceleration equations to find the amount of time it would take to transverse the distance?
I am not a physicist (yet), so be merciful. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello Nick, welcome to PF :smile: !

Not sure what you mean with "I am not a physicist (yet)" -- but if you are going to be one, you should walk the walk and talk the talk. I.e. write out equations and then solve them. In your case something like $$\vec F = m\vec a$$ and if I understand you well, $$| \vec F | = {GM m\over r^2} $$ and you describe the free fall of an object with mass m that is let go from a distance ##r_0## above M and you want to describe ##|r|## as a function of time. So you get an equation like $${d^2r\over dt^2} = -{A\over r^2}$$with ##r(t=0) = r_0##. Am I right so far ?

--
 
Yes, right so far
 
Nick Heller said:
how would you calculate the amount of time it would take for the object to hit the surface of the larger sphere (also assuming the larger sphere moves negligibly)?
You cannot find a closed form solution for a function ##r(t)##, but you can find ##t(r)##.
First, observe that ## a= v \frac{dv}{dx}##
Now assume that ##dx=-dr## (i.e. only the displacement of the smaller mass leads to a reduction in the radial distance between the two masses), so that ## \int v dv = \frac{v^2}{2} = \int_{r_0}^r - \frac{GM}{r^2} dr## where ##r_0## is the radial distance of the smaller mass from the larger mass at t=0.
You can then calculate t by substituting ##v=\frac{dx}{dt} = \frac{-dr}{dt}##, and rearranging the differentials so that $$ t = \int_{r_0}^{r} \frac{-dr}{\sqrt{2 \int_{r_0}^r - \frac{GM}{r^2} dr}}$$
You can then just substitute ##r=R## into the final expression you get to calculate the time the smaller mass takes to fall that radial distance. (Remember to compute the definite integral in the denominator first.)
 
Nick Heller said:
Yes, right so far
Solving the differential equation involves a couple of tricks that are not easy to spot.

You can also get the answer from Kepler's laws. But, again, the trick is not easy to spot.
 
By the way, the average of the force over distance will not give you the average acceleration.
You need the average over time.

You can use the average over distance to calculate the work, though. Which is the same as doing that integral.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top