Calculating Escape Velocity on the Equator: Is It Possible?

AI Thread Summary
Escape velocity is influenced by geographic coordinates, particularly due to the Earth's shape, which causes the distance from the surface to the center to vary with latitude. The conservation of energy principle indicates that an object must have sufficient kinetic energy to overcome gravitational potential energy to escape Earth's influence. The discussion clarifies that while the object's initial kinetic energy includes contributions from Earth's rotation, escape velocity itself is a specific threshold that must be reached, independent of any additional kinetic energy from rotation. The calculations presented initially were critiqued for incorrectly assuming the object was in a circular orbit. Understanding these nuances is essential for accurately calculating escape velocity.
blost
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
hello... I've got some small problem with Escape velocity. So... is it dependent on geographic coordinate ? I suppose "Yes!"... but is it true?

Using conservation of energy, I calculate this velocity on equator this way:

\frac{mv^2}{2}= \frac{GMm}{R} - \frac{m(2 \pi R)^2}{T^2*R }
Am I right ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
blost said:
hello... I've got some small problem with Escape velocity. So... is it dependent on geographic coordinate ? I suppose "Yes!"... but is it true?

Using conservation of energy, I calculate this velocity on equator this way:

\frac{mv^2}{2}= \frac{GMm}{R} - \frac{m(2 \pi R)^2}{T^2*R }
Am I right ?
Are you trying to take into account the speed of the escaping object when it is sitting on the earth? Why?

To escape the earth, the object has to have enough kinetic energy so that its total energy (kinetic + potential) is greater than 0.

Condition for escape: KE + PE > 0.

AM
 
blost said:
hello... I've got some small problem with Escape velocity. So... is it dependent on geographic coordinate ? I suppose "Yes!"... but is it true?

Using conservation of energy, I calculate this velocity on equator this way:

\frac{mv^2}{2}= \frac{GMm}{R} - \frac{m(2 \pi R)^2}{T^2*R }
Am I right ?

You've assumed that your escaping mass is locked in a circular orbit around the earth, that is completely incorrect.
I also don't think you're comparing any actual energies of the object. What two states are you comparing? Try and compare the state where it's released from the surface of the earth, and the one when it has escaped it (It is no longer influenced by Earth's gravitational field, what does that mean energy-wise?)

Read Andrew Mason's pointers, they should help you get started, and you should then see whether the solution depends on your initial position or not.
 
Last edited:
I know that KE+Pe>0.
And I know that escaping mass isn't locked in a circular orbit around the earth, but it's still got a kinetic energy from Earth rotation, so i don't know, is Kinetic energy a sum of kinetic energy of Earth rotation and energy which must be inserted to this object?
 
blost said:
I know that KE+Pe>0.
And I know that escaping mass isn't locked in a circular orbit around the earth, but it's still got a kinetic energy from Earth rotation, so i don't know, is Kinetic energy a sum of kinetic energy of Earth rotation and energy which must be inserted to this object?
Yes, of course. But the question asks for the escape velocity, not the velocity or energy that you must add in order to achieve the escape velocity.

The reason the equator is important in this question is this: the distance from the Earth's surface to the centre varies with latitude. It is greatest at the equator.

AM
 
Andrew Mason said:
Yes, of course. But the question asks for the escape velocity, not the velocity or energy that you must add in order to achieve the escape velocity.

thanks. Now i know...

by the way... sorry for my not-recherche language. English is not my native language (I'm 17 from Poland-3 h eng for a week ;/ 37 people in my class ;/ as like Cambodia... ), so please be tolerate :)
 
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