Proportion Problem Dealing with Moon's Period

  • Thread starter Thread starter PeachBanana
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Period
AI Thread Summary
If the moon were four times its current distance from Earth, its orbital period would increase significantly. The relationship between the period (T) and distance (r) is given by T being directly proportional to r raised to the power of 3/2. By applying this proportionality, the calculation shows that the new period would be approximately 32 weeks. The discussion also touches on the method of setting up equations to solve for the new period using initial and final values. Overall, the correct answer to the problem is confirmed to be 32 weeks.
PeachBanana
Messages
189
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



18. If the moon were four times the distance from the Earth than it currently is, the amount of time it would take to go around the Earth would be roughly (the current orbital period of the moon is about four weeks)

A. 8 weeks
B. 11 Weeks
C. 16 Weeks
D. 32 Weeks
E. 64 Weeks

Homework Equations



T is directly proportional to (r)^3/2

The Attempt at a Solution



I absolutely am awful at problems that deal strictly with proportions.

T = (4)^(3/2)
(4)^(3/2) = 8 weeks

Since the coefficient in front of "T" is "one," should I multiply four by eight since the problem states the period of the moon is about four weeks long?

Also, is there a maximum number of times a person can post in one day? I feel like I post a lot.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I have no idea about a maximum number of votes, but who cares anyway!

Proportions are okay if you think about them in a good way (as with most things). Personally I like to introduce a constant so the statement "T is directly proportional to (r)^3/2" I would write as
T \propto r^{3/2}
then
T = C r^{3/2}

then you also have an equation for when the distance changes, using primes

T' = C r'^{3/2}

Now you are left with two coupled equations (see that C remains the same!) and a relation

r'=4r

By solving for T' you will see some cancellation which will you an answer.

I think doing it the method you have tried is possible. I get 32 if that helps.
 
You might find it easier to set up your ratios as an equation. If T is proportional to r3/2, then ignoring constants of proportionality write:

##T^2 \propto r^3##

Then if you have initial and final values (one or more of which may be unknowns), then you might write:

## T1^2 \propto r1^3 ##
## T2^2 \propto r2^3 ##

Dividing one relation by the other:

## \frac{T1^2}{T2^2} = \frac{r1^3}{r2^3}##

Substitute in the things you know and solve for what you want.
 
gash789 said:
I have no idea about a maximum number of votes, but who cares anyway!

Proportions are okay if you think about them in a good way (as with most things). Personally I like to introduce a constant so the statement "T is directly proportional to (r)^3/2" I would write as
T \propto r^{3/2}
then
T = C r^{3/2}

then you also have an equation for when the distance changes, using primes

T' = C r'^{3/2}

Now you are left with two coupled equations (see that C remains the same!) and a relation

r'=4r

By solving for T' you will see some cancellation which will you an answer.

I think doing it the method you have tried is possible. I get 32 if that helps.

Do you mind explicitly explaining how you went from T' = C r'^{3/2}

to r'=4r ? I also got 32, which is the correct answer, but I'm still just a tad bit confused.
 
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