Gravitational Potential Energy with reference point at infinity?

AI Thread Summary
Gravitational potential energy (GPE) can vary based on the reference point chosen, such as infinity or the surface of a planet. When calculating GPE from infinity, the value is negative, indicating that work must be done to bring the mass from infinity to a point in space. The formula for GPE at a distance r from the center of a planet is derived from the gravitational force and involves the planet's radius (R) and mass (M). The discussion clarifies that R represents the planet's radius, while r is the distance from the planet's center to the mass in question. Understanding these variables is crucial for accurately calculating potential energy in different contexts.
Tommy1995
Messages
39
Reaction score
0
So, the gravitational potential energy of a mass "X" from the sun is, let's say, 100joules.

Why is it that when we take the gravitational potential energy of the mass from the reference point of infinity that the gravitational potential energy is -100joules?

I understand the negative symbol but it amazes me that the mass would still have the exact same value of 100.

Please help me! :P
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's not. You are misunderstanding something. If it's -100J from reference at infinity, it doesn't mean it's 100J with reference at the surface. At the surface, you have -MmG/R from infinity. So if you are distance r away, the energy with reference to surface is MmG/R-MmG/r.
 
Aaaahh I see K^2, thanks!

But you see how u said, "So if you are distance r away, the energy with reference to surface is MmG/R-MmG/r." What would be the different values of "R" and "r"? I'd like help to know how you can calculate the values of Potential energy from a reference point such as the surface of a planet.

I made up my own thought experiment, finding the potential energy of a 10kg ball at distance 100m from the Earth's surface and found the Gravitational potential energy to be 1000J using the formula W=FS. It was totally different to the Ep found using the formula "-Gmm/r" to find the Ep from infinity... So I have another question, how did they derive "Ep=-Gmm/r" ? It seems I don't quite understand how it calculates the work needed to move an object from an extremely large distance to a point X in space :/

Thanks again for helping me clear up my misunderstandings!
 
Tommy1995 said:
But you see how u said, "So if you are distance r away, the energy with reference to surface is MmG/R-MmG/r." What would be the different values of "R" and "r"? I'd like help to know how you can calculate the values of Potential energy from a reference point such as the surface of a planet.
That's what these are for. R is radius of the planet. r is position at which you want potential energy, also from center of the planet. M is mass of the planet, and m is mass of the body whose potential you want.
 
Thanks again K^2! :D

Btw what is GMm/R finding?
 

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
View full post »

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
View full post »

Similar threads

Gravitational potential energy -- Why is it always negative?
Replies
10
Views
3K
B Can energy be decomposed?
Replies
2
Views
1K
I How to interpret this definition of potential energy?
Replies
10
Views
2K
How to relate the gravitational potential energy zero to the axes?
Replies
4
Views
2K
I Change of coordinates in a potential energy field
Replies
2
Views
1K
B Conservation of KE in a moving frame
Replies
3
Views
1K
Gravitational Potential Reference Point
Replies
6
Views
3K
Gravitational potential between two massive particles....
Replies
4
Views
2K
Deriving gravitational potential energy (by bringing mass from infinity to r)
Replies
3
Views
2K
What does gravitational potential mean ?
Replies
8
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top