Radial movement in a gravitational field

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the problem of one-body radial movement in a Newtonian gravitational field, specifically focusing on deriving the particle's position as a function of time, ##r(t)##. Participants explore the complexities of the mathematical formulation and integration involved in this problem.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents their calculations involving Newton's second law and energy conservation to derive an integral for ##t(r)##, expressing surprise at the complexity of the resulting integral.
  • Another participant recalls a related problem from Classical Physics, highlighting the challenges of relating distance fallen to time fallen and mentioning the use of Kepler's laws to simplify the analysis.
  • A third participant comments on the unexpected complexity of the problem, suggesting that it requires clever calculus and references other threads discussing similar issues.
  • A later reply provides a specific case solution for ##r(t)## assuming the object falls from an infinite distance and from rest, simplifying the equations considerably.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the complexity of the problem and the challenges in deriving ##r(t)##, but there is no consensus on the general solution or approach, as different methods and assumptions are discussed.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the limitations of the initial approach, particularly regarding the ability to invert the relation to obtain ##r(t)## and the specific assumptions made in the later reply regarding energy conservation.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and educators in physics, particularly those interested in gravitational motion, mathematical modeling, and the challenges of integrating non-linear equations in classical mechanics.

haushofer
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
3,081
Reaction score
1,599
Dear all,
to keep me busy on a Sunday I considered the "1-body radial movement in a (Newtonian) gravitational field problem". I was a bit surprised to find it quite hard finding decent explanations on it. My question is: does anyone have a reference of the explicit solution to the particle's position ##r(t)##? Let me show my calculation:

We consider a particle with mass m being attracted by a mass M >> m in a gravitational field. We let it go at ##t=0## from a distance ##r(t)=r_b##. Newton's second law states

m\ddot{r} = - \frac{GMm}{r^2}

We can integrate this equation to find the total energy,

E = \frac{m}{2}\dot{r}^2 - \frac{GMm}{r} \ \ \ \ \ (1)

which is conserved on-shell (by Newton's second law),

\dot{E} = (m\ddot{r} + \frac{GMm}{r^2}) \dot{r} = 0

I want to solve for the particle's position ##r(t)## using the energy. For that I rewrite eqn.(1) as

\dot{r} = - \frac{\sqrt{2Er + 2GMm}}{\sqrt{mr}}

choosing the minus-sign because the particle's position ##r(t)## decreases. Now we separate variables:

\int_{r_b}^{r} \frac{\sqrt{r}}{\sqrt{Er+GMm}}dr = -\sqrt{\frac{2}{m}} \int_0^t dt

The integral can be solved by using the "standard" primitive

\int \frac{\sqrt{x}}{\sqrt{x+a}}dx = \sqrt{x^2 + ax} - a \ln{|\sqrt{x} + \sqrt{x+a} |} + C

with ##a## constant and C the integration constant:

\Bigl[\sqrt{r^2+ar} - a \ln{|\sqrt{r}+\sqrt{r+a}|} \Bigr] - \Bigl[\sqrt{r^2_b+a r_b} - a \ln{|\sqrt{r_b}+\sqrt{r_b+a}|} \Bigr] = - \sqrt{\frac{2E}{m}} t

where I defined

a \equiv \frac{GMm}{E}

This gives us ##t(r)##.

I must say that, having not done this kind of stuff for a while, I'm a bit surprised that simple radial movement in the 1-body approximation already gives a nasty integral like this. My question is basically this: can I invert my relation to obtain ##r(t)##? Between ##r(t)=r_b## and ##r(t)=0## the function ##r(t)## should be invertible, right? And am I right to be surprised that the result is quite complicated, or did I make a mistake?Thanks in advance!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Kninfinite and jerromyjon
Physics news on Phys.org
While I can't comment much on your work, the problem did remind me of one we did in Classical Physics.

We needed to show that a particle initially at rest and then falling from a great height to the Earth took 9/11 of the time to fall the first half of the journey. On the surface, it looks straightforward but then you must relate distance fallen to time fallen and then things get nasty.

After falling to solve it a prof gave us a hint to use Kepler's laws to simplify it namely the equal areas in equal times law and to consider a very narrow orbit and then the problem fell apart.
 
You did all the calculus correctly, but I agree it isn't very satisfying, not being able to invert it to get r as a function of t. However, if you assume that the object falls from an infinite distance and from rest, E = 0. This simplifies the equations considerably leading to the result:

r(t) = ( rb3/2 - 3(√(GM/2)) t )2/3 .

I know you posted this several months ago, but I am a physics professor and I thought I'd give you a way to get r(t) if only for a specific case. - Bob
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: haushofer

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
562