Force needed to move a free floating object through space

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the forces required to move an object through space, specifically focusing on the theoretical and practical considerations of moving large celestial bodies, such as moons or planets. Participants explore concepts related to Newton's laws of motion, energy expenditure, and gravitational influences.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions if there is an equation to calculate the force needed to move an object in space.
  • Another participant clarifies that no force is needed to maintain motion, only to accelerate an object.
  • A participant inquires about the terminology for initiating movement of a celestial body, specifically a moon.
  • One response outlines that applying a constant force results in constant acceleration, referencing Newton's 2nd law and providing equations for force and energy related to motion.
  • Another participant expresses interest in the feasibility of moving Jupiter's moon Europa to Earth orbit, highlighting concerns about gravitational interactions and energy requirements.
  • A later reply suggests that dislodging Europa from Jupiter's gravitational influence would require more than a simple force, proposing the idea of creating a gravitational anomaly.
  • One participant asks how to calculate the force exerted on an object when only kinetic energy is known, reiterating earlier points about force and energy relationships.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying views on the mechanics of moving celestial bodies, with some agreeing on the principles of force and acceleration while others propose speculative methods for overcoming gravitational challenges. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing ideas presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference Newton's laws and energy calculations, but the discussion includes assumptions about gravitational influences and the feasibility of proposed methods without detailed mathematical validation.

Ryan Delaney
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
This is going to sound like a really simple question but i was wondering if there is an equation to calculate the force needed to move an object through outer-space

Thanks in advance
Ryan D
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
You don't need any force to move an object. You only need force to accelerate an object. Once it's going, it will keep going at the same speed.
 
so say you're trying to move a free floating planet what would the word be to get it moving

p.s. eventually i want to be able to calculate it with all the other planets and breaking out of orbit
 
If you apply a constant force to an object, you will get constant acceleration given by Newton's 2nd law. F = ma, where m is the mass of the object. In principle, any amount of force will get an object moving as fast as you need if given enough time. In practice, you want it done in some finite amount of time. Under constant acceleration, Δv = at. So if you have change of velocity Δv, in mind that you want to achieve in some time t, the force required is given by F = mΔv/t. In the process, you will expend at least E = (1/2)mv² of energy, which will be equal to the kinetic energy of the body. If you plan to use rockets, or something like that, you will use up a lot more energy, but in space, you rarely have a way to get around that.

For orbital motion, there are many nifty shortcuts. If you outline what you want the final problem to look like, I might have better suggestions.
 
the basis of the problem is that i want to see if it would be possible to move a moon of Jupiter Europa to Earth orbit without creating gravitational problems but first i have to see how to get it moving and how much energy is needed then there is the planets along the way that will most likely cause more energy to be expended

does that answer your question?
 
good insight K2.a question.how can we calculate the force exerted on an object when we only know the kinetic energy it possesses and nothing else?.

K^2 said:
If you apply a constant force to an object, you will get constant acceleration given by Newton's 2nd law. F = ma, where m is the mass of the object. In principle, any amount of force will get an object moving as fast as you need if given enough time. In practice, you want it done in some finite amount of time. Under constant acceleration, Δv = at. So if you have change of velocity Δv, in mind that you want to achieve in some time t, the force required is given by F = mΔv/t. In the process, you will expend at least E = (1/2)mv² of energy, which will be equal to the kinetic energy of the body. If you plan to use rockets, or something like that, you will use up a lot more energy, but in space, you rarely have a way to get around that.

For orbital motion, there are many nifty shortcuts. If you outline what you want the final problem to look like, I might have better suggestions.
 
Ryan Delaney said:
the basis of the problem is that i want to see if it would be possible to move a moon of Jupiter Europa to Earth orbit without creating gravitational problems but first i have to see how to get it moving and how much energy is needed then there is the planets along the way that will most likely cause more energy to be expended

does that answer your question?
the only possible way of doing so, would be to dislodge Europa from the gravitational forces of the planet jupiter, mere than a simple nudging force...perhaps the answer lays in creating a gravitational anomaly in subspace around the object itself and then creating some type of minor implosion once the forces of gravity are counter acted, Roy C, Silva
 
Nonsense thread locked.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K