If there was a zero net acceleration at the equator?

AI Thread Summary
If there were zero net acceleration at the equator, the Earth's rotational acceleration would need to equal gravitational acceleration at 9.8 m/s². Calculating the required rotational velocity yields approximately 7901.013 m/s. This results in a day length of about 506.56 seconds, or roughly 0.141 hours. Further calculations using an alternative method suggest the day length could be around 1.407 hours, which is consistent with the findings. The discussion emphasizes the importance of verifying calculations through multiple methods for accuracy.
PotentialE
Messages
57
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


How long would a day have to be on Earth if there was zero net acceleration at the equator?


Homework Equations


Ac=v^2/r
Vrotational=Ac / Radius of earth
g = 9.8m/ss
T = Earth's circumference / rotational velocity
V= SQRT(Ac*R)
Earth's Radius = 6.37x10^6
Earth's circumference = 40023890.41


The Attempt at a Solution


The real acceleration of Earth due to it's rotation is .03m/ss, but it doesn't really matter to us because g=9.8m/ss so we can stay on Earth. so the net acceleration in 9.8 - .34

if there was a zero net acceleration, then the acceleration of Earth due to it's rotation would have to be 9.8m/ss, right?

so doing V= SQRT(Ac*R), i get 7901.013m/s for the rotational velocity of the Earth.

T = Earth's circumference / rotational velocity, i get 506.56s, or, .141hrs. Is that correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
PotentialE said:

Homework Statement


How long would a day have to be on Earth if there was zero net acceleration at the equator?


Homework Equations


Ac=v^2/r
Vrotational=Ac / Radius of earth
g = 9.8m/ss
T = Earth's circumference / rotational velocity
V= SQRT(Ac*R)
Earth's Radius = 6.37x10^6
Earth's circumference = 40023890.41


The Attempt at a Solution


The real acceleration of Earth due to it's rotation is .03m/ss, but it doesn't really matter to us because g=9.8m/ss so we can stay on Earth. so the net acceleration in 9.8 - .34

if there was a zero net acceleration, then the acceleration of Earth due to it's rotation would have to be 9.8m/ss, right?

so doing V= SQRT(Ac*R), i get 7901.013m/s for the rotational velocity of the Earth.

T = Earth's circumference / rotational velocity, i get 506.56s, or, .141hrs. Is that correct?

I take it the question relates to how quickly the Earth would rotate if an object released is not observed to fall, as we currently see.

That is what happens in an orbitting satellite/space station.

They are not very far above the surface [compared to the Radius of the Earth [R = 6000+ km, but many satellites are only ~300 km above the surface] so they give a good indication of what is necessary.

Many of those satellites go around about once every 90 minutes, or a bit less, so we can imagine a day on that fast spinning world would be about 85-90 minutes long.
 
PotentialE said:

Homework Statement


How long would a day have to be on Earth if there was zero net acceleration at the equator?


Homework Equations


Ac=v^2/r
Vrotational=Ac / Radius of earth
g = 9.8m/ss
T = Earth's circumference / rotational velocity
V= SQRT(Ac*R)
Earth's Radius = 6.37x10^6
Earth's circumference = 40023890.41


The Attempt at a Solution


The real acceleration of Earth due to it's rotation is .03m/ss, but it doesn't really matter to us because g=9.8m/ss so we can stay on Earth. so the net acceleration in 9.8 - .34

if there was a zero net acceleration, then the acceleration of Earth due to it's rotation would have to be 9.8m/ss, right?

so doing V= SQRT(Ac*R), i get 7901.013m/s for the rotational velocity of the Earth.

T = Earth's circumference / rotational velocity, i get 506.56s, or, .141hrs. Is that correct?


You might get there quicker if you used Ac = 4π2R/T2 rather than Ac = v2/R
 
ok, i checked my math by doing my way again and you're way and i got 1.407 hours, my bad. but is 1.47hours now correct?
 
PotentialE said:
ok, i checked my math by doing my way again and you're way and i got 1.407 hours, my bad. but is 1.47hours now correct?

Why did you just change 1.407 to 1.47 ?

It is certainly an answer around the right size!

EDIT: If you use two methods and get the same answer, that answer is most likely correct.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top