Is it possible to find orbital velocity depending on time?

AI Thread Summary
Determining the orbital period of a satellite requires knowledge of its radius, as per Kepler's Law, and cannot be calculated with only the gravitational constant (G) and Earth's mass. The relationship established by Kepler indicates that the square of the orbital period is proportional to the cube of the radius. When calculating Earth's mass using the moon's orbit, it is suggested to subtract the moon's mass from the total to achieve a more accurate result. The calculation provided shows that after accounting for the moon's mass, Earth's mass is approximately 5.99E+24 kg. Accurate calculations are essential for precise astrophysical measurements.
hmvince
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
A satellite is in orbit around earth,
(you know G, mass of earth, etc. but NOT the radius)
is it possible to find orbital period?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hmvince said:
A satellite is in orbit around earth,
(you know G, mass of earth, etc. but NOT the radius)
is it possible to find orbital period?

If only G and mass are all that is known, then No. According to Kepler's Law you must know the radius to get the orbital period, (or vice versa). All you can determine with only G and M is the ratio of the orbital period squared to the radius cubed...which is equal to 4(pi)^2 / GM.

Creator
 
Sorry about the late reply, but thankyou very much.
If it's not too much trouble, when calculating the mass of the Earth using the moon as a reference and Kepler's 3rd Law, is it correct to subtract the moon's mass after completing the sum:

Code:
m[SUB]e[/SUB] = (4*(pi)[SUP]2[/SUP]*r[SUP]3[/SUP]) / (G*t[SUP]2[/SUP])

m[SUB]e[/SUB] = (4*(pi)[SUP]2[/SUP]*385000000[SUP]3[/SUP]) / (G*2358720[SUP]2[/SUP])

m[SUB]e[/SUB] = 6.07[SUB]E[/SUB]+24

Should I be subtracting the moons mass to get:

Code:
m[SUB]e[/SUB] = 6.07[SUB]E[/SUB]+24 - 7.36[SUB]e[/SUB]+22  =   5.99[SUB]E[/SUB]+24

I know its not a big difference but I would like to be doing this correctly.
Thanks very much
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...

Similar threads

Back
Top