Orbits of planets/Angular momentum

  • Thread starter Physics122
  • Start date
  • #1
20
0

Homework Statement



Show that the angular momentum in circular orbit around a mass
M can be written as functions of just the masses, the
orbit radius, and G.


Homework Equations



L = r x p = r x mv
L = Iw


The Attempt at a Solution



I had no trouble showing that the total energy can be written with these variables, but the angular momentum is proving much tougher. I know this has to do with Keplars Law and maybe this will help:
Newton's law of universal gravitation states that the force is proportional to the inverse square of the distance; a_r = -GM/r^2
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
collinsmark
Homework Helper
Gold Member
2,903
1,268
I had no trouble showing that the total energy can be written with these variables, but the angular momentum is proving much tougher. I know this has to do with Keplars Law and maybe this will help:
Newton's law of universal gravitation states that the force is proportional to the inverse square of the distance; a_r = -GM/r^2
So far so good. Now think about how centripetal acceleration might fit into the picture too.
 
  • #3
ideasrule
Homework Helper
2,266
0
You also know that the acceleration is equal to the centripetal acceleration, v^2/r.
 
  • #4
20
0
So far so good. Now think about how centripetal acceleration might fit into the picture too.
Centripital acceleration = force of gravity! (GMm/R^2)

bing bong boom do some calculations and convert the angular velocity from centripital to velocity through v=wr and then I should get the angular momentum. One question, so
L=mvr and I found what v was and I already have r but to which mass does that m in the equation refer to??
 
  • #5
ideasrule
Homework Helper
2,266
0
No, centripetal acceleration = ACCELERATION of gravity. Remember that F=ma, so a force can never equal an acceleration.
 
  • #6
20
0
No, centripetal acceleration = ACCELERATION of gravity. Remember that F=ma, so a force can never equal an acceleration.
oops sorry, I wrote out my thoughts too quickly, thusly they made no sense

Here was my thought process;

Fgrav = GMm/R^2
Centripital Force = mw^2R so I decided to set these two equal to eachother and find the angular velocity which ended up being this:
w = the square root of (GMm/mR^3)
then keeping in mind that v=wR I get
v = R * the square root of (GMm/mR^3)
and because we know L = mvR I just plugged in the v I just got -->
L = m * (the square root of (GMm/mR^3) * R) * R

I really hope that's right because it makes sense to me. My only question was whether the beginning m was the orbiting object or the stationary one??
 
  • #7
ideasrule
Homework Helper
2,266
0
Seems right, but why didn't you cancel out the m's in GMm/mR^3?

"m" is the orbiting object's mass because centripetal (=towards center) force applies to the object that's moving in a circle.
 
  • #8
136
0

Homework Statement



Show that the angular momentum in circular orbit around a mass
M can be written as functions of just the masses, the
orbit radius, and G.


Homework Equations



L = r x p = r x mv
L = Iw


The Attempt at a Solution



I had no trouble showing that the total energy can be written with these variables, but the angular momentum is proving much tougher. I know this has to do with Keplars Law and maybe this will help:
Newton's law of universal gravitation states that the force is proportional to the inverse square of the distance; a_r = -GM/r^2

Angular velocity is given as [itex]\omega[/itex], where [itex]\theta[/itex] is the angle with some value, and [itex]\Delta[/itex] is the change operator.

They have the given relationships:

[itex]\omega = \frac{\Delta \omega}{\Delta t}[/itex]

[itex]\alpha = \frac{\Delta \omega}{\Delta t}[/itex]

which reads that the angular acceleration is the change in angular velocity over time. Since you have the condition of [itex]L=I \omega[/itex], this means that we may as well describe this in terms of a linear momentum, without any perturbations.

It can be calculated that the velocity of the circular motion by the formula:

[itex]V_{constant} = \frac{2 \pi R^2}{t}[/itex]
 
  • #9
20
0
Seems right, but why didn't you cancel out the m's in GMm/mR^3?

"m" is the orbiting object's mass because centripetal (=towards center) force applies to the object that's moving in a circle.
In a similar vein, I was trying to figure out what would happen to the length of our days if the moons distance was 1.5 times its current value from earth. I found an equation online that said that P = A^1.5 where P is the orbital period and A is the average distance. I don't understand how they derived or got that equation? any ideas?
 
  • #10
collinsmark
Homework Helper
Gold Member
2,903
1,268
In a similar vein, I was trying to figure out what would happen to the length of our days if the moons distance was 1.5 times its current value from earth. I found an equation online that said that P = A^1.5 where P is the orbital period and A is the average distance. I don't understand how they derived or got that equation? any ideas?
I wouldn't say that it's equal, but the period is proportional to distance raised to the 1.5 power, yes.

It can be derived with the same equations discussed in this thread. Just recognize that the period is time taken for the object to go all the way around the circle. In other words, the time taken for the object to traverse a distance of [tex] 2 \pi R [/tex]. Noting that speed times time equals distance,

[tex] vP = 2 \pi R [/tex]

or

[tex] P = \frac{2 \pi R}{v} [/tex]

With that, combined with some other equations discussed in this thread, you should be able to calculate where the R1.5 proportionality comes from.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
136
0
I wouldn't say that it's equal, but the period is proportional to distance raised to the 1.5 power, yes.

It can be derived with the same equations discussed in this thread. Just recognize that the period is time taken for the object to go all the way around the circle. In other words, the time taken for the object to traverse a distance of [tex] 2 \pi R [/tex]. Noting that speed times time equals distance,

[tex] vP = 2 \pi R [/tex]

or

[tex] P = \frac{2 \pi R}{v} [/tex]

With that, combined with some other equations discussed in this thread, you should be able to calculate where the R1.5 proportionality comes from.
I have just noticed i've used [itex]R^2[/itex] in my last post. This post has correctly stated the equation:

[tex] P = \frac{2 \pi R}{v} [/tex] without any sqaure term - sorry about that. Glad no one noticed... i think ;)
 

Related Threads on Orbits of planets/Angular momentum

  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
334
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
947
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
271
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
3K
Top