What is the relationship between escape velocity and gravitational forces?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between escape velocity and gravitational forces, exploring the definitions and calculations related to escape velocity, including the role of centrifugal force and energy considerations in orbital mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant defines escape velocity as the speed at which the kinetic energy plus gravitational potential energy equals zero and questions the approach of equating attractive force to centrifugal force.
  • Another participant suggests that exceeding the centripetal force allows for elliptical orbits, indicating that sufficient energy is needed for escape paths to become parabolic or hyperbolic.
  • Several participants express confusion regarding the relationship between velocity and forces, particularly in the context of escape velocity versus circular motion.
  • A participant introduces the Virial Theorem, explaining that in a closed orbit, the average kinetic energy is related to the average potential energy, leading to the conclusion that escape velocity requires a specific energy condition.
  • Another participant clarifies that to escape, the initial velocity must be high enough to overcome gravitational pull, emphasizing the need for kinetic energy to equal the negative potential energy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the concepts of escape velocity and the forces involved. There is no consensus on the initial confusion regarding the calculations, but some participants agree on the necessity of balancing kinetic and potential energy to determine escape velocity.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of forces and energy in different contexts, as well as the mathematical steps involved in deriving escape velocity from the balance of forces.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in orbital mechanics, gravitational physics, and the mathematical relationships between forces and energy in celestial contexts.

MRbrs
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi guys!

I want to ask something about escape velocity.

I know the definition of EV "escape velocity is the speed at which the kinetic energy plus the gravitational potential energy of an object is zero"(wikipedia).

Can we approach the problem by equalling the attractive force to the centrifugal force. I tried to find the the V in this way but I found the V \sqrt{2} times smaller. What is wrong with it?

mv^2/r = GmM/r^2

V=\sqrt{GM/r}

sorry about my poor English.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When velocity is greater than the centripetal force, it just means that the path will not be circular, but it still can be an elliptical orbit. You need sufficient energy for the path to be a parabola or hyperbola.
 
I think when we increase the velocity of the object, centrifugal force becomes greater then attractive force so it escapes. However my equation is still false, why?
 
MRbrs said:
I think when we increase the velocity of the object, centrifugal force becomes greater then attractive force so it escapes. However my equation is still false, why?

The last post explained why. An increase in velocity will only increase in an elliptical orbit unless it is large enough.

Look at it this way: The object increases speed, so it begins to climb away. However, as it climbs it loses speed in exchange for gravitational potential. Eventually, it reaches a point where it loses enough speed that gravity starts to win the battle again and it begins to fall back. It gains speed at it falls, eventually returning to the point where it started and repeats the cycle again.

The only way that the object can completely escape is for the initial velocity increase to be large enough that the increase in altitude and corresponding decrease in gravity strength keeps ahead of the loss of velocity. This happens when:

V = \sqrt{\frac{2GM}{r}}
 
Thanks rcgldr and Janus for correcting me.

Velocity and force sometimes confuse me. I approached the concept of escape velocity as if the escape force. I guess the only way to determine the velocity is using the kinetic and the potential energies. So thanks again.
 
What you stumbled on with that radical-2 is Virial Theorem. It states that in any central potential for any closed orbit the average kinetic energy is minus a half of the average potential energy. In order for object to escape, kinetic energy must be equal to minus the potential energy.

In circular orbit, kinetic energy is always the same, so in order to double it, you must increase velocity by square root of 2. So that's exactly the factor by which escape velocity is different from velocity when centrifugal and gravitational forces are balanced.
 
k^2 said:
what you stumbled on with that radical-2 is virial theorem. It states that in any central potential for any closed orbit the average kinetic energy is minus a half of the average potential energy. In order for object to escape, kinetic energy must be equal to minus the potential energy.

In circular orbit, kinetic energy is always the same, so in order to double it, you must increase velocity by square root of 2. So that's exactly the factor by which escape velocity is different from velocity when centrifugal and gravitational forces are balanced.

Ok. I first write the equation of forces

mv^2/r = GmM/r^2

then multiplying both sides by r and dividing by 2

1/2 mv^2 = GmM/2r (The equation which you told)

V = \sqrt{GM/r}

this v is true when the objects are balanced. However to find the escape velocity I will have to balance the kinetic energy with potential energy. So I must multiply the velocity by sqrt of 2. Now, everything is clear. Thanks a lot to everyone.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K