Orbiting Satellite Energy Conservation

  • Thread starter Thread starter oasis13
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Satellite
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the conservation of energy and angular momentum in the context of an orbiting satellite, specifically addressing the equations governing circular orbits, such as L=mvR. The participant expresses confusion regarding the conservation of energy before and after a collision, questioning whether the potential energy should also be considered alongside kinetic energy. The conclusion drawn emphasizes that while kinetic energy remains unchanged if no work is done, potential energy must also be accounted for in energy conservation calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of circular motion and the equation L=mvR
  • Familiarity with the work-energy theorem
  • Knowledge of kinetic and potential energy concepts
  • Basic principles of angular momentum conservation
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the principles of energy conservation in mechanical systems
  • Study the relationship between kinetic and potential energy in orbital mechanics
  • Learn about the implications of torque on angular momentum
  • Explore advanced topics in orbital dynamics and energy transfer during collisions
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly those focusing on mechanics and orbital dynamics, as well as educators seeking to clarify concepts related to energy conservation and angular momentum.

oasis13
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I have uploaded the question. See attachment "question001"

Homework Equations


L=mvR for circular orbit

The Attempt at a Solution


See attachment "answer001". The problem is that my final answer seems to be imaginary, and I have tried to look for mistakes in my algebra which would lead me to this and haven't found any. Am I wrong in assuming that the Energy before the explosion is the same as the energy after the collision? I assumed that because no work was done on the orbiting mass, the energy was conserved. And there is no torque acting so angular momentum should be conserved.

I would be really grateful if someone could point out where I am going wrong :smile:
 

Attachments

  • question001.jpg
    question001.jpg
    27.5 KB · Views: 447
  • answer001.jpg
    answer001.jpg
    20.1 KB · Views: 501
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The work-energy theorem refers to the change of kinetic energy. The KE of the satellite remains the same if no work was done on it. But what about the potential energy?

ehild
 

Similar threads

How Does Satellite Mass Impact Velocity Change for Circular Orbit Achievement?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Angular momentum for a bullet and a rod attached to a ceiling
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Velocity of a satellite in a eccentric orbit
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Speed of charged balls after collision
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
Using conservation of energy and momentum in projectile motion
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Circular orbit change after gaining mass ejected from sun
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Angular Momentum Conservation in Spacecraft Orbits
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Conservation of Mechanical Energy - Which Equation To Use?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Criteria for Determining Satellite's Return from Orbit?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Angular momentum of a satellite
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
8K