Falling under gravity with decreasing r

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the time it takes for an object to fall from a height of 1000 km above the moon's surface, assuming no air resistance. The key equation derived is the second derivative of the radius, expressed as a nonlinear differential equation, which relates acceleration to gravitational force. The integration of this equation leads to a formula for time based on energy conservation principles, allowing for the calculation of velocity at various points during the fall. The final expression for time incorporates the radius values and includes a comparison to constant acceleration scenarios to verify accuracy. The complexity of the integral and the potential for errors in calculations are acknowledged, emphasizing the mathematical intricacies involved in gravitational physics.
numberjuggler
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
If you drop an object from a great height with no air resistance. e.g. 1000 km above the moon. How long will it take to hit the surface?

(GM_{}1M_{}2)/r^{}2 = M_{}2a

r^{}..=k/r^{}2

Hmm this is my first post, not quite getting the symbols.

"The second derivative of r is equal to a constant divided by r squared"

So presumably you integrate that nonlinear differential equation. Somehow.

This is quite an obvious question. It seems like something Isaac Newton would have asked when he first discovered the equations of gravity. A really classic piece of physics. But I can't seem to calculate the answer or find it anywhere.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
$$\ddot{r}=\frac{-k}{r^2}$$
As code: $$\ddot{r}=\frac{-k}{r^2}$[/color]$

Or, in ASCII: d^2/dt^2 r = -k/r^2

The minus sign gives the usual convention that r is the (positive) radius and k is positive, too.

With energy conservation, you can calculate the velocity for every point of your motion. The inverse velocity is "time per length" - if you integrate that over the length of the motion, you get the total time.
 
Here is a rule which can be useful sometimes.
\ddot{r} = \frac{dv}{dt} = \frac{dv}{dr}\frac{dr}{dt} =\frac{dv}{dr} v

Applying this to this situation:
\frac{dv}{dr} v = - \frac{k}{r^2}

v \mathop{dv}= - \frac{k}{r^2}\mathop{dr}

\frac{v^2}{2} = \frac{k}{r} + C_1
We want that at r_0, the velocity is zero
\frac{v^2}{2} = \frac{k}{r} - \frac{k}{r_0}

Next I used the fact that the velocity of the falling object will be negative.

v = \frac{dr}{dt} = - \sqrt{\frac{k}{r} - \frac{k}{r_0}}\;\;\;\; r < r_0

-\int_{r_0}^{r_1} \frac{dr}{\sqrt{\frac{k}{r} - \frac{k}{r_0}}} = \int_0^t dt'\;\;\;\; r_1 < r_0
So the time would be
t = -\frac{1}{\sqrt{k}}\int_{r_0}^{r_1}<br /> \frac{dr}{\sqrt{\frac{1}{r} - \frac{1}{r_0}}} \;\;\;\; r_1 &lt; r_0
Now comes the task of finding this integral.

x = \frac{1}{r} \;\;\;\; dx = -\frac{dr}{r^2}

dr = -r^2 dx = -\frac{dx}{x^2}

-\int \frac{dr}{\sqrt{\frac{1}{r} - \frac{1}{r_0}}} = \int \frac{dx}{x^2\sqrt{x - \frac{1}{r_0}}}

Many steps omitted. Integral obtained using Wolfram Alpha.

\int \frac{dx}{x^2\sqrt{x - \frac{1}{r_0}}}= \frac{r_0<br /> \sqrt{x - \frac{1}{r_0}} }{ x} +r_0^{3/2}tan^{-1}\left(\sqrt{r_0}\sqrt{x - \frac{1}{r_0}}\right)

substituting back for x:
= rr_0\sqrt{\frac{1}{r} - \frac{1}{r_0}} +r_0^{3/2}tan^{-1}\left(\sqrt{r_0}\sqrt{\frac{1}{r} - \frac{1}{r_0}}\right)

note that this will in fact be zero at r = r_0 so we have

t = \frac{1}{\sqrt{k}} \left[ r_0r_1\sqrt{\frac{1}{r_1} - \frac{1}{r_0}} +r_0^{3/2}tan^{-1}\left(\sqrt{r_0}\sqrt{\frac{1}{r_1} - \frac{1}{r_0}}\right) \right] \;\;\;\; r_1 &lt; r_0

I am not sure that I have not made a mistake. One thing you could do to check this is to compare it to the falling time for constant acceleration and see if it is close for small distances.

t = \sqrt{\frac{2(r_0 - r_1)}{g}} = \sqrt{\frac{2r_0^2(r_0 - r_1)}{k}} \;\;\;\; r_1 &lt; r_0
 
Sorry, I was missing a \sqrt{2}.

t = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2k}} \left[ r_0r_1\sqrt{\frac{1}{r_1} - \frac{1}{r_0}} +r_0^{3/2}tan^{-1}\left(\sqrt{r_0}\sqrt{\frac{1}{r_1} - \frac{1}{r_0}}\right) \right] \;\;\;\; r_1 &lt; r_0
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?

Similar threads

Back
Top