How Does Epsilon Equal One Result in a Parabola in Orbital Equations?

  • Thread starter Thread starter KBriggs
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Orbital
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the orbit equation for bodies in inverse square fields, specifically how it describes different conic sections based on the eccentricity (epsilon). When epsilon equals 1, the equation suggests a parabolic trajectory, but there is confusion about how this relates to the semi-major axis being infinite. The participants clarify that the product of the semi-major axis and (1-e^2) equals a constant related to angular momentum, which complicates the interpretation of the equation. There is a request for further explanation on calculating these values, indicating a need for deeper understanding of the relationship between a and epsilon. The conversation highlights the nuances of orbital mechanics and the mathematical implications of eccentricity in conic sections.
KBriggs
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Hey all

the prof derive the orbit equation for bodies in inverse square fields as:

r=\frac{a(1-\epsilon^2)}{1+\epsilon\cos(\theta)}

Now, I understand how this gives an ellipse for epsilon between 0 and 1, but when epsilon is one, how does this give a parabola? Isn't the equation identically 0 if epsilon = 1?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
a is supposed to be the semi-major axis, but that's infinity for a parabola. The product of a and 1-e^2 is actually a constant, equal to h^2/GM where h is the angular momentum per unit mass.
 
ideasrule said:
That article shows that the OP's equation is correct.
I corrected my post, misread the OP.
 
ideasrule said:
a is supposed to be the semi-major axis, but that's infinity for a parabola. The product of a and 1-e^2 is actually a constant, equal to h^2/GM where h is the angular momentum per unit mass.

Could you show me how that would be calculated? We don't have anything about a being a function of epsilon.
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
Back
Top