Calculating Kinetic & Potential Energies of Earth at Perihelion/Aphelion

AI Thread Summary
To calculate the kinetic and potential energies of Earth at perihelion and aphelion, the equations GMm/R^2 = m(v^2)/R and v = √(GM/R) are foundational. The kinetic energy is expressed as E = (1/2)GMm/R, while potential energy is U = -GMm/R. However, the change in energy between perihelion and aphelion requires careful consideration of elliptical orbits, as the velocities differ from those in circular orbits. The total energy at any point can be analyzed using specific energy per unit mass, leading to Leibniz's vis-viva equation, which ensures energy conservation. Accurate calculations must account for the specific potential energy at both perihelion and aphelion to maintain consistency.
frisky
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
How do you calculate the kinetic and potential energies of the Earth at the perihelion and aphelion?

Given that the Earth's orbit is nearly circular

GMm/R^2 = m(v^2)/R where M = sun's mass, m = Earth's R = orbital radius

so

v = √(GM/R)

The kinetic energy, E, would be

E = (1/2)m(v^2) = (1/2)GMm/R

The Earth's potential energy, U, would be

U = -GMm/R

However, the change in E between the perihelion and aphelion would be

(1/2)GMm/[(1/R) - (1/r)] where R and r are the respective orbital radii;

while the change in U would be

-GMm/[(1/R) - (1/r)] .

Given conservation of energy, the last two terms can not both be right.

This brings me back to the original question.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
frisky said:
How do you calculate the kinetic and potential energies of the Earth at the perihelion and aphelion?

Given that the Earth's orbit is nearly circular

GMm/R^2 = m(v^2)/R where M = sun's mass, m = Earth's R = orbital radius

so

v = √(GM/R)

The kinetic energy, E, would be

E = (1/2)m(v^2) = (1/2)GMm/R

The Earth's potential energy, U, would be

U = -GMm/R

However, the change in E between the perihelion and aphelion would be

(1/2)GMm/[(1/R) - (1/r)] where R and r are the respective orbital radii;
This is not correct. What you have calculated here is the difference in E between two circular orbits of radii r and R. With a ellipitical orbit the orbital velocity at perhelion is greater than the circular orbital velocity for that radius and the orbital velocity at aphelion is less than the circular orbital velocity for that radius.
while the change in U would be

-GMm/[(1/R) - (1/r)] .

Given conservation of energy, the last two terms can not both be right.

This brings me back to the original question.
 
Let's see if I can give you a push in the right direction:

The equations:

V = \sqrt{\frac{GM}{r}}
and
E = \frac{GMm}{2r}

Are only true for an elipitical orbit when r = A (The semimajor axis of the orbit, or average orbital distance).

U = -\frac{GMm}{r}

is true for all points of the orbit.

So what is the total energy (E+U) at a radius A?
is This the same as the total energy at r and R?

Hopefully, this will give you enough to go from here.
 
You're using rough estimates (treating the orbit as circular for each velocity, for example), so it won't cancel out. If you use exact values, it will.

First off, it's easier if you use the specific energy per unit of mass to analyze the motion, then multiply the mass back in if you need an actual value for energy.
E=m\epsilon where \epsilon is specific energy
m\epsilon=m(\frac{1}{2}v^2-\frac{GM}{r})
\epsilon=\frac{1}{2}v^2-\frac{GM}{r}

If you rearrange this:

v=\sqrt{2\epsilon+\frac{2GM}{r}

E is also equal to:

\epsilon=-\frac{GM}{a}
where a is your average radius (semi-major axis).

Substituting and rearranging, you get Leibniz's vis-viva equation:

v=\sqrt{GM(\frac{2}{r}-\frac{1}{a})}
(If you have a circular orbit, the radius and semi-major axis are equal, which reduces to the equation you used.) If you use this equation for velocity, your calculations will show energy is conserved. (substitute the velocity equation into the specific kinetic energy equation)

You have to calculate the specific potential energy for both perihelion and apohelion, as well. In other words, substitute the radius of perihelion for R and the radius of apohelion for R.

If you need the actual energy of the orbit, multiply the mass back in, but it's not necessary to show energy is conserved.
 
Thanx.

I understand this now.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top