Newtons law of universal gravitational question

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the interpretation of satellite altitude in relation to Newton's law of universal gravitation. Participants clarify that the radius of the planet should indeed be added to the satellite's altitude to determine the distance from the center of mass. There is a consensus that the term "orbit" typically implies this distance is measured from the planet's center. Additionally, clarity in terminology is emphasized to avoid confusion in calculations. Accurate understanding of these terms is crucial for correct gravitational calculations.
redruM
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
http://www.boredofstudies.org/community/attachment.php?s=&postid=266675

when doing this question, isn't the radius of the planet supposed to be added to the altitude of the satellite?
having said that, would the term 'orbit' mean that the satellite is 35 000km away from the centre of mass, ie the centre of the planet and hence the radius is already included?

thanks for any replies :smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
the distance d is the distance between the centres of mass of the two bodies. so yes, the radius of the planet should be added to the altitude of the satellite.

i assume that in that sample question, 35,000km refers to the distance from the planet's centre of mass, otherwise the calculation would be innacurate. however, i would generally understand the orbit altitude to refer to the altitude above the surface of the planet.

as long as you specify what you mean by certain terms, it doesn't really matter (the example you gave doesn't do this). this is physics, not semantics.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top