Gravitational Plot: Accuracy Checked

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Invutil
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravitational Plot
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the accuracy of gravitational motion equations, specifically addressing the use of constant acceleration formulas in variable force scenarios. The equations presented include x(t) = x0 + v0 t + 1/2 a t^2 and F = G m1 m2 / r^2, with emphasis on their applicability in planetary motion versus free fall. Participants highlight the complexity of planetary motion equations, which lead to second-order differential equations and relate to Kepler's laws. The consensus is that numerical integration is necessary for accurate modeling of motion under variable gravitational forces.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Newton's laws of motion
  • Familiarity with gravitational force equations, specifically F = G m1 m2 / r^2
  • Knowledge of differential equations and their application in physics
  • Experience with numerical integration techniques for solving motion equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and implications of Kepler's laws of planetary motion
  • Learn about numerical integration methods for solving differential equations in physics
  • Explore the differences between constant and variable acceleration in gravitational contexts
  • Investigate the implications of negative radius values in gravitational equations, particularly in relation to Kerr black holes
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, astrophysicists, and engineers involved in gravitational modeling and simulation, particularly those focusing on planetary motion and free-fall dynamics.

Invutil
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Is this the correct plot of gravity and motion?

x(t) = x0 + v0 t + 1/2 a t^2

F = G m1 m2 / r^2

x(t) = x0 + v0 t + t^2 / (x2 - x(t))^2
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2015-11-05 at 4.27.18 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2015-11-05 at 4.27.18 PM.png
    27.3 KB · Views: 449
  • Screen Shot 2015-11-05 at 5.11.56 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2015-11-05 at 5.11.56 PM.png
    42.8 KB · Views: 482
Physics news on Phys.org
No. The first equation assumes that the acceleration is a constant. The second equation does not give a constant acceleration, so you cannot use the acceleration from the second in the first equation I don't know where you got equ 3 from. Perhaps if you stated the problem?
 
Can you explain what you're trying to do? I don't understand the third equation, nor the graphs.
 
I'm just plotting gravity free-fall.

r = (x2 - x) for x2 > x where x2 is the coordinate of mass 2

Is this correct?

x(t) = x0 + int from {0} to {t} ( v0 t + 1/2 a0 t^2 + int from {0} to {t} ( 1/2 t^2 da/dt ) dt ) dt

a0 = F/m1
a0 = G m2 / r0^2
r0 = (x2 - x0)

x(t) = x0 + int from {0} to {t} ( v0 t + 1/2 G m2 t^2 / (x2-x0)^2 + int from {0} to {t} ( d( 1/2 t^2 G m2 / (x2 - x(t))^2 )/dt ) dt ) dt

I can't get this to plot, but should there be anything special at negative radius values?
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2015-11-08 at 12.40.43 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2015-11-08 at 12.40.43 PM.png
    32.2 KB · Views: 448
You seem to be mixing up two different gravitational equations: one for a constant force (valid, for example, near the surface of the Earth); and one for a variable force (valid, for example, for planetary motion).

The first of these is mathematically simple; the second is mathematically much more complicated.
 
I guess I'm dealing with planetary scales so radius comes into effect. Is there a formula I can use? Is there anything special that happens at negative radius, like, a Kerr black hole, using a Newtonian equation? Would the constant-acceleration formula generally be correct, as it is a Taylor expansion? If so, how do you interpret the trajectory after r < 0?
 
Invutil said:
I guess I'm dealing with planetary scales so radius comes into effect. Is there a formula I can use? Is there anything special that happens at negative radius, like, a Kerr black hole, using a Newtonian equation? Would the constant-acceleration formula generally be correct, as it is a Taylor expansion? If so, how do you interpret the trajectory after r < 0?

It depends how much maths you know. The planetary motion equation leads to a second-order differential equation, from which Kepler's laws can be deduced. For free fall, say of an asteroid towards the Earth, the equation can be solved with some difficulty.
 
I think you are trying to over-simplify the problem. Your equations are still valid only for constant acceleration. Planetary motion, including that of asteroids, is described using universal gravitation for the force, and the acceleration is not constant. If you want to use the constant acceleration formula, than you have to numerically integrate the equations of motion, using short intervals of time, during which you assume that the acceleration is constant. That becomes a job to be done by a computer, and not a simple formula into which you can substitute numbers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K