Projectile Motion: Finding Maximum Height with Mechanics and Gravitation

AI Thread Summary
A particle projected from Earth's surface at 4 km/s is analyzed for maximum height using two methods: mechanics and gravitation. The mechanics approach yields a height of 816 km, while the gravitation approach results in a height of 935 km. The discussion highlights that the gravitational approach accounts for the variable acceleration due to gravity at high altitudes, making it the more accurate method. The initial velocity is significant enough to reach high altitudes where gravity changes, emphasizing the importance of using the correct formula. Ultimately, the gravitational approach is confirmed as the appropriate method for this problem.
zorro
Messages
1,378
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A particle is projected from the surface of the Earth with an initial speed of 4km/s. Find the max. height attained by the particle. Radius of Earth = 6400 km and g=9.8 m/s2


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I have two approaches to this problem.

1)Mechanics-
Since gravitational force is conservative, we have
0.5mv2 = mgh
On solving, h = 816 km

2)Gravitation-
On the surface of earth, gravitational potential energy is -gmr , where m is the mass of the body and r is the radius of earth.

At a height h, its potential energy is -gmr2/(r+h)
0.5mv2 - gmr = -gmr2/(r+h)
h=Rv2/(2gr-v2)
On solving, h = 935 km

I don't understand which approach is correct. Please help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
since the initial velocity is high the object is going to reach a very high spot... And at such heights there's a 'effective' change in g. So your mechanics approach would be wrong as the acceleration would be variable.
 
i think you have to include this change in g in your gravitational approach too..
 
Thanks dude! I got it,
in gravitational approach the change in accln. due to gravity is already included..
 
your welcome :smile:
 
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 '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