Gravitional Potential Energy Question

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves gravitational potential energy and the motion of a rock placed between two planets with different masses and radii. The rock is released from rest at a point equidistant from both planets, and the task is to derive an expression for its speed upon crashing into one of the planets.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the potential energy calculations and the signs associated with them, questioning the reasoning behind positive and negative values in the equations. There is an exploration of how to correctly account for distances from the centers of the planets.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the nature of potential energy as a scalar quantity, while others are grappling with the implications of this in their calculations. There is an ongoing examination of the assumptions made regarding the signs of potential energy terms, and some participants are attempting to reconcile their understanding with the physics concepts involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of a homework problem, which may limit the information available for discussion. The problem setup includes specific distances and masses for the planets, which are critical to the calculations being discussed.

squirrelschaser
Messages
14
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Planet 1 has mass 3M and radius R, while Planet 2 has mass 4Mand radius 2R. They are separated by center-to-center distance 8R. A rock is placed halfway between their centers at point O. It is released from rest. Ignore any motion of the planets.
The rock is released from rest at point O. Derive an expression for the speed v with which the rock crashes into a planet.

Homework Equations



KE = 1/2 *m *v^2
PE = GMm/R

The Attempt at a Solution



(3GMm/4R) -4GMm/4R = .5mV^2 + (3GMm/6R) - (4GMm/2R)

-1GMm/4R = (.5mV^2) - (3GMm/2R)

5GMm/4R = .5mV^2

5GMm/2R = mV^2

5GM/2R = V^2

(2.5GM/R)^(1/2) = V (My answer)

(1.5GM/R)^(1/2) = V (Actual answer)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Please show your reasoning.
Note - how far is point O from each of the centers?
 
squirrelschaser said:
PE = GMm/R

Check the sign of the right hand side.

The Attempt at a Solution


(3GMm/4R) -4GMm/4R = .5mV^2 + (3GMm/6R) - (4GMm/2R)


Why are some of your PE terms positive while others are negative?
 
Simon Bridge said:
Please show your reasoning.
Note - how far is point O from each of the centers?

4R. IT's halfway between the center and center point. So 8R/2.
 
TSny said:
Check the sign of the right hand side.
Why are some of your PE terms positive while others are negative?
Not sure. I arbitrarily chose the attraction to the left as positive (PE from the moon) and the attraction to the right as negative (PE from the Earth).

Should they all be negative?
 
4R. IT's halfway between the center and center point. So 8R/2.
... hence the 4R in your equations?
What about showing the reasoning?

Not sure. I arbitrarily chose the attraction to the left as positive (PE from the moon) and the attraction to the right as negative (PE from the Earth).
You should not be arbitrary - use your understanding of physics. Note: potential energy is not a vector.
 
Simon Bridge said:
... hence the 4R in your equations?
What about showing the reasoning?

?.

Simon Bridge said:
You should not be arbitrary - use your understanding of physics. Note: potential energy is not a vector.

Well maybe not arbitrarily, I thought since the 2 PE are in opposite direction, one would be positive and one would be negative.

I will try this it with all the PE as negative values.
 
Last edited:
-(3GMm/4R) -4GMm/4R = .5mV^2 - (3GMm/6R) - (4GMm/2R)

-7GMm/4R = .5mV^2 - 15GMm/6R

9GMm/12R = .5V^2

9GM/12R = .5V^2

18GM/12R = V^2

sqrt(1.5GM/R) = V.

Alrighty, I got the answer. I knew that PE isn't a vector, but it didn't make sense to me (logically) that a PE in another direction is the same sign as PE in another direction. (There's a picture that came along with the problem and the moon and the Earth were on opposite side of the object). It make sense on paper then since scalar quantities don't have direction but it's kinda counter-intuitive for me( still is).
 
I knew that PE isn't a vector, but it didn't make sense to me (logically) that a PE in [one] direction is the same sign as PE in another direction.
Since PE is not a vector, there is no such thing as "PE in a particular direction". This is the statement that makes no sense.

It is hard to get used to working with energy when you are used to forces - you just have to get used to it.

PE is a property of an object at a position - the PE at a particular position is the sum of the PE at the same position from all sources.
The gradient of the PE function tells you the force ... this is probably what you are intuitively thinking of as PE in one direction or another.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K