Gravity & conservation of energy with two bodies

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the stability of orbits between two bodies in deep space, particularly in the context of gravity and conservation of energy. Participants explore concepts from classical mechanics and general relativity, considering whether orbits will remain stable indefinitely or if they will decay over time due to various factors.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that if two bodies are in a stable orbit, their orbits will remain stable indefinitely, as there is no fading gravitational force.
  • Another participant argues that in classical mechanics, the gravitational field is conservative, meaning that bodies in orbit do not gain or lose energy.
  • A different viewpoint introduces general relativity, stating that gravity waves generated by orbiting bodies could lead to energy loss, causing orbits to decay over time, albeit very slowly.
  • One participant reflects on the nature of gravity, suggesting it is not a force in the traditional sense but rather a curvature of space that allows objects to follow paths without energy expenditure.
  • A later reply mentions that if the orbits are non-circular, gravitational waves will cause energy loss, which could lead to circularization of the orbits, after which no further energy loss would occur.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the stability of orbits, with some asserting that orbits remain stable indefinitely while others highlight the potential for energy loss through gravitational waves, indicating a lack of consensus.

Contextual Notes

Participants make various assumptions, such as the bodies being perfect spheres and tidally locked, which may influence their arguments. The discussion also references the detection of gravitational waves and the implications of energy loss, which remain unresolved.

mjcguest
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
I just want to get my head straight on something with regards to relativity and gravity - I think it's a simple question (or rather has a simple answer!) so there's no trick agenda here.

If I have two bodies orbiting each other in deep space - far enough out for other gravitational forces to be effectively ignored, then will their orbits remain stable for effectivly ever, or will their orbits gradually decay?

For the purpose of the question, assume that they are perfect spheres, the same temperature as the space they travel through and tidally locked respect to each other (they are the only three energy sapping things I can think of that are relevant)

Thanks
Matt
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi there,

I also suppose that the two objects are in orbit since a while, meaning that they are in an equilibrium state. Then the simple answer is "no". The bodies will keep orbiting forever. There is no such things as a fading gravitational force.

Cheers
 
you don't have to make any assumptions, classically, the gravitational field is conservative, when the moon orbits the Earth it's moving in an equipotential surface, so it doesn't gain or lose energy.
in general relativity, you have to redefine the straight line as the shortest distance in time connecting two points in space, according to this definition the moon is moving in a straight line inertially.
 
This may seem like a nit-pick, but I think it's somewhat important;

With two bodies orbiting each other, GR predicts that gravity waves will be generated. These gravity waves will serve as a mechanism for energy loss, and the orbits will decay over time. It is an extremely slow process, and the detection of gravity waves has not yet been confirmed with much certainty (at least, it hadn't been the last time I checked).

The fact that the energy loss is so small can lead one to say that the orbits are essentially eternal. But, the fact that there is any energy loss at all is a reminder that nothing lasts forever.
 
Ah - If I have this right, then I think something I've read a number of times and never really thought about what it means has finally clicked; That is

- Gravity is not a force in the sense of "one thing doing something to another"- if it were, then it implies a spend of energy, which would have to be compensated for in some way, be it enlarged orbit or whatever...
- Gravity really does "tell space how to bend", so an object in a stable orbit is simply following the law that deals with objects continuing to move constantly in a "straight" line until a force acts upon them.

Lurch - thank you for your point; a nice reminder that nothing is ever quite as simple as it seems!

It's so nice to find a forum where a newb question isn't met with derisory comments and flames. Thanks all!
 
mjcguest said:
I just want to get my head straight on something with regards to relativity and gravity - I think it's a simple question (or rather has a simple answer!) so there's no trick agenda here.

If I have two bodies orbiting each other in deep space - far enough out for other gravitational forces to be effectively ignored, then will their orbits remain stable for effectivly ever, or will their orbits gradually decay?

For the purpose of the question, assume that they are perfect spheres, the same temperature as the space they travel through and tidally locked respect to each other (they are the only three energy sapping things I can think of that are relevant)

Thanks
Matt


If the orbits of the two bodies are non-circular then according to GR the system as a whole will lose orbital energy to emission of gravitational waves. This will tend to circularize the orbits. Once the orbits are circular the system will no longer lose orbital energy.

Source of this information: the following fascinating article by Kevin Brown:
http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath249/kmath249.htm
'Lead-Lag Frequency Response'
(For a shortcut to the goodies, find the word 'quadrupole' in that article)

Cleonis
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
5K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
11K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K