Change in Momentum of probe Problem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the change in velocity of comet Tempel 1 after a probe collision. Participants initially struggle with the calculations, leading to incorrect conclusions about the change in velocity being zero. It is clarified that the correct approach involves using momentum conservation, where the probe's mass is negligible compared to the comet's, resulting in a very small change in velocity. The final velocity is slightly less than the comet's original speed, with a change on the order of 10^-6 km/h. The importance of precision in calculations and the assumption of a head-on collision are also highlighted.
Legerity
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



In July 2005, NASA's "Deep Impact" mission crashed a 372-kg probe directly onto the surface of the comet Tempel 1, hitting the surface at 37000 km/h. The original speed of the comet at that time was about 40000 km/h, and its mass was estimated to be in the range (0.10-2.5) x 10^14 kg. Use the smallest value of the estimated mass. What change in the comet's velocity did this collision produce?

Homework Equations



ΔP


The Attempt at a Solution



I tried using P_initial = P_final and come out with the change in velocity of 0, or 80000 km/h, and they are both incorrect. Could someone help me as to where I am going wrong? I did:

(m_p)(v_p) + (m_c)(v_c) = V(m_p + m_c) and solved for V.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
As you can imagine, crashing the probe into something a TRILLION times its mass is going to have a very very small effect. I get 0 as well, if I use a calculator that doesn't have enough precision ;).

Also, are you meant to assume that this is a "head on" collision, i.e. that vp and vc initially have directly opposite directions? The problem doesn't say. EDIT: but that is what I assumed.
 
cepheid said:
As you can imagine, crashing the probe into something a TRILLION times its mass is going to have a very very small effect. I get 0 as well, if I use a calculator that doesn't have enough precision ;).

Also, are you meant to assume that this is a "head on" collision, i.e. that vp and vc initially have directly opposite directions? The problem doesn't say. EDIT: but that is what I assumed.
I guessed that my calc was giving me 0 because of that too! And about the opposite directions, I am not sure since it is not stated in the original problem at all. I did solve the problem though. I did (372 x 37000)/(10^13) = 1.38 x 10^-6 and that seemed to work. I do not know why though...
 
Legerity said:
I guessed that my calc was giving me 0 because of that too! And about the opposite directions, I am not sure since it is not stated in the original problem at all. I did solve the problem though. I did (372 x 37000)/(10^13) = 1.38 x 10^-6 and that seemed to work. I do not know why though...

That's wrong. Completely. You were right originally:

ptotal = mpvp + mcvc

= (372 kg)(37000 km/h) + (1e13 kg)(-40000 km/h)

vfinal = ptotal/m, where m = (372 kg + 1.0e13 kg)

This should give you a final speed that is just a tiny bit less then 40000 km/h, in the negative direction. So the difference in speed of the rock will be some tiny number of order 10-6, but not what you got above.
 
cepheid said:
That's wrong. Completely. You were right originally:

ptotal = mpvp + mcvc

= (372 kg)(37000 km/h) + (1e13 kg)(-40000 km/h)

vfinal = ptotal/m, where m = (372 kg + 1.0e13 kg)

This should give you a final speed that is just a tiny bit less then 40000 km/h, in the negative direction. So the difference in speed of the rock will be some tiny number of order 10-6, but not what you got above.

The 1.38 x 10^-6 answer somehow is right because I inputted it into my online homework, and it said it was the correct answer! And using your method, my calculator always spits out 40000 km/h for the velocity, and I guess it is rounding a lot for that to happen?
 
If you note straight away that the probe's mass is so small compared with that of the comet that we can ignore its contribution to the coalesced mass, two benefits flow. First, we no longer care whether the two given velocities are collinear:
mc Δv = mc(v - vc) ≈ mp vp
Second, it avoids taking a small difference between two large numbers, and the consequent loss of precision.
 
Why you didn't write the answer in this web ,, al most of the people who know the answer just like to write a lot ,, you should know that in physics we learn by seeing the equations not by reading a lot of words
 
The V_probe is relative to the comet so the comet has no V_i so the equation should be,
(P_probe - P_comet)/(mass_probe+mass_comet)= ΔV
since it is relative to the comet,
V_comet = 0 so P_probe/mass_total = ΔV

ΔV= 372*37000(km/h)/(372+1*10^13)=?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top