Gravitational potential energy questions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of gravitational potential energy in a two-body system and the derivation of escape velocity from Earth's surface. Participants explore the implications of defining gravitational potential energy for moving bodies and the assumptions underlying escape velocity calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question why gravitational potential energy for two bodies is described as a single term rather than two separate terms, suggesting that each body could have its own potential energy.
  • Others propose that in many scenarios, one body is significantly more massive and stationary, which allows for a simpler assignment of potential energy to the smaller body.
  • It is noted that in a general case where both bodies can move, defining potential energy for just one body based on its position alone is challenging, necessitating a system-wide approach.
  • Participants discuss the derivation of escape velocity, highlighting that it assumes the Earth remains static while the object moves, and question the validity of this assumption for larger objects.
  • Some argue that escape velocity is meaningful only in static gravitational fields, typically applicable to smaller objects like rockets.
  • One participant raises a question about whether gravitational potential energy calculations require stationary objects, and if so, what this means for systems where all bodies are in motion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the treatment of gravitational potential energy in moving systems or the implications of escape velocity derivations. Multiple competing views remain regarding the definitions and assumptions involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the implications of moving bodies on gravitational potential energy calculations and the assumptions made in escape velocity derivations. The discussion highlights the complexity of these concepts without resolving the underlying questions.

andytrust
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello,
I haven't learned a lot of physics and math, but I don't know how I misunderstand the following concepts:

Why is the gravitational potential energy of a system of two bodies described in one term instead of two? If each body in a two-body system effects a gravitational force on the other one, wouldn't both objects have their own gravitational potential energy (albeit they would be the same value), instead of sharing one energy?

My second question: The derivation for the escape velocity of an object at the Earth's surface (as found for instance on Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_velocity#Derivation_using_G_and_M), seems to me to assume that the Earth remains static while the object is moving away from it. If the object were sufficiently large, wouldn't the Earth and its gravitational field move after it, making it harder for the object to escape the Earth's gravitational field, so that it would not reach infinity? Why doesn't this happen?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
andytrust said:
Why is the gravitational potential energy of a system of two bodies described in one term instead of two? If each body in a two-body system effects a gravitational force on the other one, wouldn't both objects have their own gravitational potential energy (albeit they would be the same value), instead of sharing one energy?
I guess you could say that each object has its own gravitational potential energy that is half of the total. But that'd be more complicated than just having the one potential energy for the pair together.

Actually, this might be a better line of reasoning: in many cases, one of the two bodies will be stationary, or at least so massive (compared to the other) that it effectively doesn't move. Example: the Earth and a satellite. In those cases, it makes sense to say that one body (the smaller one) has its own individual potential energy. Essentially, you assign all the potential energy of the system to the smaller body. But in the general case, both bodies are free to move, and then it's impossible to define a potential energy for one body alone based only on that body's position. You have to incorporate the position of both bodies. So it just makes sense to assign the potential energy to the system of the two bodies, and not try to split it up between them.

Plus, the formula just works :wink:

andytrust said:
My second question: The derivation for the escape velocity of an object at the Earth's surface (as found for instance on Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_velocity#Derivation_using_G_and_M), seems to me to assume that the Earth remains static while the object is moving away from it. If the object were sufficiently large, wouldn't the Earth and its gravitational field move after it, making it harder for the object to escape the Earth's gravitational field, so that it would not reach infinity? Why doesn't this happen?
You're right, the derivation does assume that the Earth remains fixed in place. Escape velocity is really only a meaningful concept in a static gravitational field - which in practice means, only for small things like rockets.
 
andytrust said:
Why is the gravitational potential energy of a system of two bodies described in one term instead of two?
The number of bodies doesn't matter. The gravitational potential energy difference between two points a and b, GPE(b) - GPE(a) is the negative of the work peformed by gravity when the object moves from a to b. For a finite number of finite sized bodies, GPE for one of those bodies at some point 'p', relative to the center of mass of the other bodies can be defined by defining GPE(∞) = 0, and then defining the potential energy at a point 'p' with respect to ∞, to be GPE(p) = GPE(∞) - GPE(p).

The derivation for the escape velocity of an object at the Earth's surface
This derivation ignores the mass of that object. The true escape velocity of a two body system, would require that the initial kinetic energy at point p be greater than or equal to GPE(p).
 
Last edited:
diazona said:
You're right, the derivation does assume that the Earth remains fixed in place. Escape velocity is really only a meaningful concept in a static gravitational field - which in practice means, only for small things like rockets.

Jeff Reid said:
The number of bodies doesn't matter. The gravitational potential energy difference between two points a and b, GPE(b) - GPE(a) is the negative of the work peformed by gravity when the object moves from a to b.

Thank you for clarifying this. I guess my question is: does it mean that when gravitational potential energy is calculated (I guess this also applies for electrical potential energy), you have to assume the object(s) doing the work remain stationary (in an inertial frame of reference)?
If that is so, does the idea of gravitational potential energy have any meaning in a system where all the bodies are moving?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
12K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
7K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K