Investigating Circular Orbit Energy: Gravity & Kinetic

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on investigating the relationship between gravitational potential energy and kinetic energy in maintaining a circular orbit. The original poster, Ben, seeks to explore any potential links between these energy types, similar to the balance of inertia and gravity. Respondents clarify that in a circular orbit, both energies remain constant, suggesting that the project may lack depth. They recommend considering more complex scenarios involving central forces and conservation laws for a more substantial exploration. The conversation emphasizes the availability of resources for deeper research into orbital mechanics.
ben111
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello,

For a college project I'm investigating energy involved in maintaining a circular orbit. The types of energy I'm investigating are gravitational potential energy and kinetic energy. I'd like to see if there is any link between the two in order to maintain the orbit i.e. in the same way inertia and gravity have to be balanced. If not anyone got any ideas about interesting things i can write about the two on this subject?

Cheers
Ben
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Huh? You are investigating a link between kinetic and potential energy beyond how the total energy is some constant, which the sum of the kinetic and potential energies must always equal? What do you mean by a link between kinetic and potential energy?
 
ben111 said:
Hello,

For a college project I'm investigating energy involved in maintaining a circular orbit. The types of energy I'm investigating are gravitational potential energy and kinetic energy. I'd like to see if there is any link between the two in order to maintain the orbit i.e. in the same way inertia and gravity have to be balanced. If not anyone got any ideas about interesting things i can write about the two on this subject?

Cheers
Ben
The relationship is very simple for a circular orbit. The potential energy and the kinetic energy both remain constaant. Does not sound like much of a college-level project to me. However, if you consider the more general case of orbits when the force is inversely poroprtional the square of the distance, or the even more ceneral case of central forces, there is a lot of interesting physics to be explored, including conservation of both energy and angular momentum. There is also a ton of readily available reference material on the subject.
 
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