Calculate Real Freefall | GM/x^2 Integral

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating real freefall by considering acceleration as GM/x^2 instead of a constant. A participant expresses difficulty in handling the integral involved in this calculation after recently graduating high school. The conversation highlights that many freefall problems do not assume constant acceleration and relate to satellite orbits. It explains how to apply Newton's second law to derive the kinetic energy formula and gravitational potential energy from first principles. The approach emphasizes understanding the underlying physics rather than relying solely on established formulas.
BoraDogan
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
We always consider the accelaration as a constant thing, while calculating the freefall problems. What if we try to calculate the real. I mean taking the accelaration GM/x^2. I tried it but i could not handle that integral(Just graduated from high school). I would be happy if you reply.
Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
BoraDogan said:
We always consider the accelaration as a constant thing, while calculating the freefall problems.
There are many problems that do not. We should have some older homework problems discussing this in our homework section.

Every satellite orbit is a related problem.
 
  • Like
Likes BoraDogan
There's a trick… Assuming no tangential component to the body's motion (as would be the case if it were released from rest) then, working with radial components of force and velocity, Newton's second law gives
\frac{GMm}{r^2}=-m\frac{dv}{dt}
So\int{\frac{GMm}{r^2}}dr=-m\int{\frac{dv}{dt}dr}
But \frac{dr}{dt}=v, so
\int{\frac{GMm}{r^2}}dr=-m\int{v\ dv}

Both these integrations are easy. Either put limits in, or leave as indefinite integrals and find the value of the arbitrary constant afterwards.

You may well now realize that the result follows immediately from energy conservation. What I did above is to establish the \frac{1}{2}m\ v^2 kinetic energy formula (and that for gravitational PE due to a spherically symmetric body) from first principles, because doing this seemed more in the spirit of your question than simply quoting energy formulae.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes BoraDogan and vanhees71
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...
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?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top