Comparing Satellite Energy in 160km and 144km Orbits

  • Thread starter Thread starter krypt0nite
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravitation
AI Thread Summary
The total energy of a satellite in orbit is influenced by its distance from the planet and the gravitational force acting on it. A 2.00 kg satellite in a 160 km orbit has a total energy of -6.09x10^7 J, while in a 144 km orbit, it has -6.12x10^7 J. The satellite in the 160 km orbit experiences weaker gravitational force, resulting in lower kinetic energy compared to the one in the 144 km orbit. However, the potential energy is higher in the 160 km orbit due to its greater distance from the planet. Thus, the higher potential energy in the 160 km orbit leads to a higher total energy compared to the satellite in the 144 km orbit.
krypt0nite
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Which is larger - the total energy of the 2.00 kg satellite in its 160. km orbit or the total energy in its 144 km orbit. Explain why the two answers are different.

Ok the total energy of 2.00 satellite in 160km orbit is -6.09x10^7 J and the total energy of 2.00 satellite in 144km orbit is -6.12x10^7 J.

How do I do the explaining part? I dont' think its simple as just saying their at different distances. Why is the satellite in the 160km orbit have a greater Etotal than the satellite in the 144km orbit?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Can u show us the resoning (not necessarily the calcuations) that led to the 2 different answers?

Daniel.
 


The total energy of a satellite in orbit is determined by its position and velocity, which are affected by the gravitational force of the planet it is orbiting. As the distance between the satellite and the planet changes, the strength of the gravitational force also changes.

In this scenario, the satellite in the 160km orbit is further from the planet compared to the satellite in the 144km orbit. This means that the gravitational force acting on the satellite in the 160km orbit is weaker than the force acting on the satellite in the 144km orbit. As a result, the satellite in the 160km orbit has a lower velocity and therefore a lower kinetic energy compared to the satellite in the 144km orbit.

However, the potential energy of the satellite is directly proportional to its distance from the planet. This means that the satellite in the 160km orbit has a higher potential energy compared to the satellite in the 144km orbit. When these two energies (kinetic and potential) are combined, we get the total energy of the satellite.

Since the potential energy of the satellite in the 160km orbit is higher, it compensates for the lower kinetic energy, resulting in a higher total energy compared to the satellite in the 144km orbit. In other words, the satellite in the 160km orbit has a higher total energy because it is further from the planet and therefore has a higher potential energy.

In conclusion, the difference in total energy between the satellite in the 160km orbit and the satellite in the 144km orbit is due to the difference in their distances from the planet and the resulting difference in their potential energies.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Thread 'A bead-mass oscillatory system problem'
I can't figure out how to find the velocity of the particle at 37 degrees. Basically the bead moves with velocity towards right let's call it v1. The particle moves with some velocity v2. In frame of the bead, the particle is performing circular motion. So v of particle wrt bead would be perpendicular to the string. But how would I find the velocity of particle in ground frame? I tried using vectors to figure it out and the angle is coming out to be extremely long. One equation is by work...
Back
Top