Conservation of Energy with an Ellipse

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the conservation of mechanical energy in elliptical orbits, specifically addressing why mechanical energy remains conserved for a satellite in such an orbit. The key conclusion is that gravitational force is a conservative force, which leads to the relationship where any change in kinetic energy (K.E.) is balanced by a change in gravitational potential energy (U_g), thus conserving mechanical energy. The conversation also touches on the implications of the larger planet's motion, suggesting that the fundamental principle of energy conservation still applies despite additional complexities.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of gravitational forces and their properties
  • Familiarity with kinetic energy (K.E.) and gravitational potential energy (U_g)
  • Basic knowledge of orbital mechanics and elliptical orbits
  • Concept of conservative forces in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of conservative forces in physics
  • Explore the mathematical formulation of energy conservation in orbital mechanics
  • Investigate the effects of perturbations in orbital motion, such as the motion of larger celestial bodies
  • Learn about the implications of energy conservation in different types of orbits, including circular and parabolic
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, astrophysicists, and anyone interested in understanding the dynamics of celestial mechanics and energy conservation in orbital systems.

SprucerMoose
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
Gday,

This may be a trivial questiom, but I just cannot figure it out.

Why is mechanical energy conserved with an elliptical orbit? I understand that the mechanical energy of the system, i.e. both bodies, is conserved, but how is this isolated to the satellite's mechanical energy being conserved?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hang on, I think I figured it out.

Is it simply because gravity is a conservative force, thus any change in K.E. = change in Ug, therefore mech energy conserved?

Does this get more complicated if we consider the little motion of the larger planet, or does this simple relationship still hold?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 89 ·
3
Replies
89
Views
11K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 77 ·
3
Replies
77
Views
6K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K