Calculating time to arbitrary points of distance with initial velocity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving a formula to calculate the time of impact for a body falling towards a planet with an initial non-zero velocity in a vacuum. Key equations are presented, including the acceleration as a function of distance and the relationship between kinetic and potential energy. The conversation highlights the need to correct a sign mistake in the initial equations to accurately reflect gravitational attraction. Integration of the equations leads to expressions for kinetic and potential energy, which are conserved quantities. The thread concludes with an acknowledgment of the complexity of the calculations and a request for further assistance in completing the derivation.
kirills
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I've been trying to tackle this question for a while now, but I'm afraid it's not going anywhere without some outside help.

So let's say we have some body falling towards a planet without any atmosphere, and let's assume that the initial velocity is not equal to zero. Given these conditions I'm trying to derive a formula which would allow me to determine the exact time of impact or, in fact, time to any given point along the trajectory of the falling body .

Let's define r0 as initial separation; r as a destination point on the trajectory of the falling body(surface, for example); v0 as initial velocity; v as instantaneous velocity at point r; t0 as initial time; and T as time at point r.

Now acceleration as a function of distance is given by:

\frac{d^2r}{dt^2}=\frac{GM}{r^2}
Using the chain rule we arrive at:

a(r)=\frac{dv}{dt}=\frac{dv}{dr}\frac{dr}{dt}=v\frac{dv}{dr} Therefore:a(r)dr=vdv
Equivalently:

\frac{GM}{r^2}=vdv
Now in order to get v:

v=\frac{dr}{dt}=\sqrt{\frac{2G(m1+m2)}{r}−\frac{2G(m1+m2)+v0^2}{r0}}
v=\frac{dr}{dt}=\sqrt{\frac{2Gr0(m1+m2)−2Gr(m1+m2)+v0^2r0r}{r r0}}
dt is calculated as:

dt=\sqrt{\frac{r0 rdr} {2Gr0(m1+m2)−2Gr(m1+m2)+(v0^2rr0)}}
Now I have absolutely no idea how to calculate dr, but I hear it has something to do with gravitational potential energy. Some guidance on this matter would be much appreciated. I also have some doubts regarding the next step of my strategy. Let's say I manage to find dr, and what then? Intuitively I feel this is a right path to take but in fact I have no idea how to convert dr and dt into T.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You've got to solve the differential equation:

\stackrel{..}{r} = GM/r^{2}
 
First off, you made a sign mistake in you first equation. Gravity is an attractive force and since it is convenient to define r to be positive than the acceleration should be negative
\frac{d^2 r}{dt^2}=-\frac{GM}{r^2}
\frac{dv}{dr}\frac{dr}{dt}=-\frac{GM}{r^2}
v\frac{dv}{dr}=-\frac{GM}{r^2}
v dv=-\frac{GM}{r^2}dr Integrating, we get
\int v dv=-\int \frac{GM}{r^2}dr
\frac{v^2}{2}= \frac{GM}{r}+C
Now is a good point to talk about energy. The quantity in the left side of the last equation is the Kinetic energy per unit mass
k=\frac{K}{m}=\frac{v^2}{2}
and the right side is related to the potential energy per unit time
u = \frac{U}{m}= - \frac{GM}{r}+C',
where C' is an arbitrary most often (and most conveniently) chosen to be equal to zero. That doesn't matter. Any value for C' works fine, but we follow convention and set C' = 0 and get
k + u = C
k+u is a conserved quantity identified with the mechanical energy per unit mass
C = e = \frac{E}{m} = k + u
the initial conditions for the problem r_0, and v_0, can be used to find the energy

e = \frac{v_0^2}{2} - \frac{GM}{r_0}

Going back to the equation
\frac{v^2}{2}= \frac{GM}{r}+e, we proceed
-v= \sqrt{\frac{2GM}{r}+2e}, where v is taken to be negative since the object is falling
-\frac{dr}{dt}= \sqrt{\frac{2GM}{r}+2e}
-dt= \frac{dr}{\sqrt{\frac{2GM}{r}+2e}}
-\sqrt{2GM}dt= \frac{dr}{\sqrt{\frac{1}{r}+\frac{e}{GM}}} = \frac{dr}{\sqrt{\frac{1}{r}-\frac{1}{R}}}, where the last equality defines R for convenience. The minus sign assumes total energy is negative. If that's not the case than a similar substitution with opposite sign might be used. Now we integrate again
-\sqrt{2GM}\int dt = \int \frac{dr}{\sqrt{\frac{1}{r}-\frac{1}{R}}} = \int \frac{dr}{\sqrt{\frac{R-r}{rR}}} = \int \frac{\sqrt{Rr}dr}{\sqrt{R-r}}
-\sqrt{\frac{2GM}{R}}\int dt = \int \frac{\sqrt{r}dr}{\sqrt{R-r}}
-\sqrt{2e}\int dt = \int \frac{\sqrt{r}dr}{\sqrt{R-r}}
Now we make the change of variable r=Rcos^2\theta
-t\sqrt{2e} = \int \frac{\sqrt{Rcos^2\theta}(-2Rcos\theta sin\theta d \theta)}{\sqrt{{R-Rcos^2\theta}}}-C''
t\sqrt{2e} = \int \frac{\sqrt{R}cos\theta(2Rcos\theta sin\theta d \theta)}{\sqrt{R}sin\theta}+C''
t\sqrt{2e} = \int \frac{\sqrt{R}cos\theta(2Rcos\theta d \theta)}{\sqrt{R}}+C''

Something came up. I won't be able to finish that post. I assume you can take it from here.
 
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