Kepler's Laws-What am I doing wrong here?

  • Thread starter Thread starter AznBoi
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion revolves around calculating the mass of Jupiter using Kepler's Laws, specifically the equation T² = (4π²/GM)r³. The user initially miscalculated the mass due to incorrect unit conversions, leaving the orbital period in days instead of converting it to seconds. The correct mass of Jupiter, derived from the proper application of the formula and consistent SI units, is 1.90 x 10²⁷ kg. The importance of using consistent units, particularly the mks system, is emphasized for accurate calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Kepler's Laws of planetary motion
  • Familiarity with the universal law of gravitation
  • Knowledge of unit conversion, particularly to the SI system
  • Ability to manipulate algebraic equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn about unit conversion in physics, focusing on the mks system
  • Study the derivation and application of Kepler's Laws
  • Explore gravitational equations and their implications in astrophysics
  • Practice solving problems involving orbital mechanics and celestial bodies
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly those focusing on celestial mechanics and gravitational theory, as well as educators looking for examples of common calculation errors in orbital dynamics.

AznBoi
Messages
470
Reaction score
0
Kepler's Laws--What am I doing wrong here?

Homework Statement


Io, a satellite of Jupiter, has an orbital period of 1.77 days and an orbital radius of 4.22 x 10^5km. From these data, determine the mass of Jupiter.


Homework Equations


T^2=(4(pi)^2/GM)r^3


The Attempt at a Solution


I converted the radius from km to meters and substituted all of the numbers to their variables. However, I still came up with the wrong answer. Please help me check my work, thanks!

Divided r^3 from both sides:
(1.77)^2/(4.22x10^8m)^3= 4(pi)^2/(6.673 x 10^-11)M

Multiplied universal gravitation constant with M(mass) on both sides:
(4.1688x10^-26)(6.673x10^-11)M=4(pi)^2

solved for M: M=4(pi)^2/ (2.78184 x 10^-36)

I came up with: 1.4192 x 10^37

The correct answer is: 1.90 x 10^27 kg

What am I doing wrong? Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Don't plug in numbers until you're done with the algebra.

Solve for M:

T^2 = \frac{4 \pi^2 r^3}{G M}

M = \frac{4 \pi^2 r^3}{G T^2}

Convert your units into mks:

r = 4.22 \cdot 10^8\,m

T = 152928\,s

Plug into the equation, and you're done. You appear to have left your T in units of days, which is inconsistent with the SI mks system.

- Warren
 
Last edited:
Ah I see.. So is every single variable in Physics in the SI unit? Thanks a lot!
 
You're free to use any unit system you want, but you must be consistent. If you want to use G = 6.673 x 10^-11, you must understand its units:

G = 6.67300 \cdot 10^{-11} \,\textrm{m}^{3} \,\textrm{kg}^{-1} \,\textrm{s}^{-2}

That means that everything else in your equation must in terms of meters, kilograms, and seconds: the standard mks SI system.

If you really wanted to use days as your fundamental unit of time, you could, but G would be:

G = 0.498136781 \,\textrm{m}^{3} \,\textrm{kg}^{-1} \,\textrm{day}^{-2}

- Warren
 
chroot said:
You're free to use any unit system you want, but you must be consistent. If you want to use G = 6.673 x 10^-11, you must understand its units:

G = 6.67300 \cdot 10^{-11} \,\textrm{m}^{3} \,\textrm{kg}^{-1} \,\textrm{s}^{-2}

That means that everything else in your equation must in terms of meters, kilograms, and seconds: the standard mks SI system.

If you really wanted to use days as your fundamental unit of time, you could, but G would be:

G = 0.498136781 \,\textrm{m}^{3} \,\textrm{kg}^{-1} \,\textrm{day}^{-2}

- Warren

Wow, thanks for all the superfluous replies! Okay, I understand it clearly now. Thanks to you! :smile:
 
No problem. Try plugging in your values for r in meters and T in days, using the "version" of G that I provided. :wink:

- Warren
 
AznBoi said:
Wow, thanks for all the superfluous replies! Okay, I understand it clearly now. Thanks to you! :smile:

Your adjective "superfluous" is incorrectly applied in this context. Please re-check the definition. Thank you.
 
Yeah, sometimes I don't know if the vocabulary I've learned makes sense in what I say/write. Here is the definition: Being beyond what is required or sufficient. How come it doesn't work with chroot's replies? :biggrin:
 
Well, the word "superfluous" usually means that something was pointless or needless, not that it was unexpectedly generous.

You might say "Man, this textbook is horrible! It's full of superfluous sidebars," in order to disparage it. You probably wouldn't tell your mom "Thanks for all these superfluous Christmas gifts!"

- Warren
 
  • #10
chroot said:
Well, the word "superfluous" usually means that something was pointless or needless, not that it was unexpectedly generous.

You might say "Man, this textbook is horrible! It's full of superfluous sidebars," in order to disparage it. You probably wouldn't tell your mom "Thanks for all these superfluous Christmas gifts!"

- Warren

Oh I see why berkeman said that to me then. Sorry if you thought of it as the other way. My vocabulary isn't that great and it's still developing. I mean I know the definitions to some words but I just haven't had much experience with them. That's why some of my sentences are weird lol. Alright, thanks for the vocab. lesson xD I'll try not to use the word superfluous as something that is too super. Thanks to both of you.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K