Does Kinetic Energy Decrease When an Object Slows Down in Orbit?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of kinetic energy and gravitational potential energy in the context of an object in an elliptical orbit around a star. Participants explore how these energies change as the object moves through different points in its orbit, particularly focusing on the relationship between kinetic energy, potential energy, and total energy within the system.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether the kinetic energy of the system decreases as the object slows down, and whether the total energy of the system decreases as well.
  • Others argue that in a truly closed system, energy is conserved, meaning any decrease in kinetic energy would correspond to an increase in gravitational potential energy.
  • A participant suggests that without a mechanism to reduce energy, an object in orbit would maintain its energy, similar to celestial bodies like the Moon or Earth.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the behavior of an object in an elliptical orbit, noting that it slows down when moving away from the star and speeds up when approaching it.
  • There is a discussion about whether the total energy (kinetic + potential) remains constant throughout the orbit or changes at different points.
  • One participant expresses interest in how gravitational potential energy changes with varying distances from the star, suggesting that energy should differ based on distance due to changes in gravitational field strength.
  • Another participant confirms that if no energy is lost or gained from external sources, the decrease in kinetic energy would equal the increase in gravitational potential energy, and vice versa.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conservation of energy in orbital mechanics, with some asserting that energy is conserved in a closed system while others highlight the complexities introduced by external influences. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of energy changes in elliptical orbits.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that real systems may experience energy loss or gain due to external factors, which complicates the idealized scenario of energy conservation. There are also uncertainties regarding the definitions and implications of kinetic and potential energy changes in the context of orbits.

astros10
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
An object orbits a star, both items comprise the system. I am looking for confirmation of a couple of concepts regarding orbits.

As the object slows down, does the kinetic energy of the system decrease, and does the total energy of the system decrease?
As the kinetic energy of the system increases, does the gravitational potential energy decrease?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF, Astros.
I am no expert in any of this stuff by anyone's stretch of imagination, but I'll throw in my 2 cents anyhow.
To start with, no situation in the universe constitutes a true closed system... except for the universe itself. There are always gravitational, electromagnetic and possibly (:rolleyes:) other effects from other areas. Even the perpetual popping in and out of virtual particles indicates interference. That having been said, those effects are pretty much negligible in the scenario that you propose.
If it was truly closed, then the system could suffer no loss of total energy. What is lost in one area is gained in another.
As for your last question, either it's too vague or I just don't understand it. To my thinking, more information about how the kinetic energy is increased would be needed.
Hang tight... someone who knows what he's talking about should be along shortly.
 
"someone who knows what he's talking about" ... or just me.:wink:

astros10 - why are you suggesting that the object slows down? Unless there's some mechanism for reducing its energy, then it will just continue in an unchanged orbit, like the Moon around the Earth, or the Earth around the Sun. You'll have to be a little more specific about the scenario you have in mind in order to get a good answer.
 
Perhaps my questions were phrased poorly. If it is an elliptical orbit, which I should have specified, then the object would slow down as it moves away from the star or speed up as it approaches a point closer to the star, atleast that was my understanding. If it was slowing down, is it true that the kinetic energy of this system is decreasing, and if so would that mean that the gravitiational potential energy would be increasing and vice versa for speeding up? And would the total energy, kinetic + potential decrease at any point of the orbit, or would it stay the same?
 
astros10 said:
Perhaps my questions were phrased poorly. If it is an elliptical orbit, which I should have specified, then the object would slow down as it moves away from the star or speed up as it approaches a point closer to the star, atleast that was my understanding. If it was slowing down, is it true that the kinetic energy of this system is decreasing, and if so would that mean that the gravitiational potential energy would be increasing and vice versa for speeding up? And would the total energy, kinetic + potential decrease at any point of the orbit, or would it stay the same?

Ah, I see what you mean... Well I would be interested in hearing the answer as well although I am interested if the gravitational potentional energy increases/deacreases by simply placing the planet at different distances from the star, since the gravitational field strength differs depending at which distance you are from the source, the energy should differ too.

Tachyon.
 
Last edited:
Yup, you've got it. If there's no way for energy to leak in or out of the system, say by "borrowing" energy from some third body, then the object's total energy is conserved, so the decrease in kinetic energy exactly equals the increase in gravitational potential energy (and the reverse as the object goes from apoapsis to periapsis, which are the generalizations of apogee and perigee).

In reality, there are always other effects that do inject or remove energy from the system, but this is good for a first approximation.
 
Oh -- yes, the grav. pot. energy is just a function of the distance from the center of the grav. field, since it represents the amount of work required to move the object from distance r1 to distance r2.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
7K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K