Kepler's Laws, two large bodies

  • Thread starter Thread starter bbbl67
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    bodies Laws
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the orbital radius and speed of a star orbiting a black hole with a mass of approximately 3 solar masses and an orbital period of 2.4 hours. The provided answer for the orbital radius is 5.7E8 m, but participants express confusion over how to derive this using Kepler's laws, particularly due to the need for assumptions about the star's mass. It is noted that the simplified Kepler equations may not apply since both bodies have significant mass. The conversation highlights the challenge of solving for two unknowns without additional information, suggesting that assumptions about the star's mass are necessary to proceed. Ultimately, the complexity of the problem illustrates the limitations of applying Kepler's laws in scenarios involving massive bodies.
bbbl67
Messages
216
Reaction score
21
< Mentor Note -- thread moved to HH from the technical physics forums, so no HH Template is shown >[/color]

Here is something that some one asked me, as their homework question, and it stumped me.

A star is seen orbiting a black hole. The black hole's mass is 6.0E30 kg (approx, 3 solar masses). The star has an orbital period of 2.4 hours. The questions are:

(A) What is the star’s orbital radius in meters?
(B) What is the star’s orbital speed in m/s?

For #A, they were given the answer to be 5.7E8 m. But they couldn't match how they got that answer. My feeling is since it's a stellar mass black hole and a star, the two objects are relatively close in mass to each other, so you can't use the simplified Kepler equations, you have to use the general Kepler equations:

T2 = (4 Π2 r3)/(G (M1 + M2))

But I'm not sure about how to solve this, given that there are two unknowns here, the orbital radius, and the mass of the star. How do you go about solving for the star mass?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
You cannot determine the mass, the radius or anything else without additional assumptions. As the question asks for radius, I guess you have to make some assumption about the star's mass.
 
mfb said:
You cannot determine the mass, the radius or anything else without additional assumptions. As the question asks for radius, I guess you have to make some assumption about the star's mass.
That's what I figured, but I thought I might be missing something. Maybe an assumed equation that let's you simultaneously solve both variables together?
 
The star is just at the Roche limit? That would give an interesting question.
The star is our sun?
The star is very light compared to the black hole?

I don't know.
 
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 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
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