Linking gravity, angular velocity and radius

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between gravity, the radius of the Earth, and angular velocity, particularly in the context of centripetal acceleration. Participants explore how these concepts interrelate and the implications for understanding gravitational acceleration at the Earth's surface.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about linking gravity to the radius of the Earth and angular velocity, noting discrepancies in calculated values.
  • Another participant clarifies that the computed radius does not represent the Earth's radius but rather the radius needed for an orbit with a one-day period, emphasizing the role of gravitational acceleration and normal force.
  • There is a question about the distinction between centripetal acceleration and gravitational acceleration, with a participant seeking to understand how to relate the Earth's radius to its gravitational acceleration.
  • A participant notes that the Earth's rotation affects apparent gravity, suggesting that if the rotation were fast enough, apparent gravity could be zero at the Equator.
  • Another participant explains that centripetal force is the net force required for circular motion and discusses the balance of forces experienced by objects on the Earth's surface.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the relationship between centripetal and gravitational acceleration, and there are competing views on how to properly link these concepts to the radius of the Earth.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the importance of including units in calculations, and there is mention of the effect of Earth's rotation on gravitational perception, indicating that the discussion involves nuanced considerations of physics principles.

jonnybmac
Messages
13
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I am having trouble linking gravity to the radius of the Earth and angular velocity. I was using this as a solid method to confirm the equation for values of a different sort based on centripetal acceleration. When inputting the values though it does not add up and I cannot see where and why

Homework Equations


w = θ/time
α = w2r = centripetal acceleration
α = g
g = w2r = acceleration due to gravity
r = g/w2

The Attempt at a Solution


Since α has the values m s-2 and g = m s-2
α = gif
w = 2π/86400 (rotation of Earth per day)
≈ 7.272 * 10-5 rad s-1

and
g = 9.81 m s-2

then aranging
g = w2r

to

r = g/w2
= 9.81/(7.272 * 10-5)2 m
≈1.86 * 109 m

Now if I google radius of Earth I get 6.37 * 106 m

This is nowhere near the radius that I should be getting with the above equation, so where am I going wrong?

Many thanks for reading
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
First of all: Always write out your units. A statement such as g=9.81 is utterly meaningless unless you write out the m/s^2.

To answer your question, what you computed is not the radius of the Earth. It is the radius at which the gravitational acceleration at the Earth’s surface would be sufficient to keep an orbit with a one day period.

At the Earth’s actual surface, the gravitational acceleration is far too large on its own to be in a circular orbit with that period. That is why you feel a normal force from the ground that generally is sufficient to just balance out the gravitational acceleration. The net acceleration is a result of both the gravitational and the normal force.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: QuantumQuest, jonnybmac and PeroK
Orodruin said:
First of all: Always write out your units. A statement such as g=9.81 is utterly meaningless unless you write out the m/s^2.

To answer your question, what you computed is not the radius of the Earth. It is the radius at which the gravitational acceleration at the Earth’s surface would be sufficient to keep an orbit with a one day period.

At the Earth’s actual surface, the gravitational acceleration is far too large on its own to be in a circular orbit with that period. That is why you feel a normal force from the ground that generally is sufficient to just balance out the gravitational acceleration. The net acceleration is a result of both the gravitational and the normal force.

Thank you for your response, and apologies for the lack of units - I have amended the original post.

So centripetal acceleration is not the same as gravitational acceleration? how would you link the radius of the Earth and its gravitational acceleration at its surface then?

I was of the understanding that at whatever radius and speed the particle is travelling, it would produce a different centripetal acceleration.
In the case of earth, I presumed the 9.81 m s-2 was relative to the distance from the centre and the angular speed at which it is travelling. Since angular speed is a constant, the only thing that can change gravitational acceleration is the radius?
 
jonnybmac said:
Thank you for your response, and apologies for the lack of units - I have amended the original post.

So centripetal acceleration is not the same as gravitational acceleration? how would you link the radius of the Earth and its gravitational acceleration at its surface then?

I was of the understanding that at whatever radius and speed the particle is travelling, it would produce a different centripetal acceleration.
In the case of earth, I presumed the 9.81 m s-2 was relative to the distance from the centre and the angular speed at which it is travelling. Since angular speed is a constant, the only thing that can change gravitational acceleration is the radius?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_of_Earth#Variation_in_gravity_and_apparent_gravity

The gravity at the Earth's surface depends only on the mass and radius of the Earth. The Earth's rotation has the effect of reducing the "apparent" gravity slightly (and changing its direction slightly) because of the centripetal force needed to keep things on the surface.

If the Earth were spinning fast enough, then the apparent gravity at the Equator could be zero. Although it would be unaffected at the Poles.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jonnybmac
Thank you for clearing that up for me
 
Centripetal force mv^2/r is the _net_ force that must be applied to an object to make it move in a circle of radius r and Velocity v.

If the applied force is greater than mv^2/r the object would normally move with a smaller radius than r. You can prove this by dropping an object. Gravity at the Earth's surface provides more force than mv^2/r so dropped objects fall, reducing r.

Objects in contact with the Earth's surface experience a normal force which the reduces the net force to exactly mv^2/r so the radius r remains constant.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jonnybmac

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
6K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K