Radially falling towards the Earth

  • Thread starter Thread starter nos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Earth Falling
AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the time it takes for a small mass to fall radially towards Earth from infinity, using gravitational equations. The trajectory is modeled mathematically, leading to the conclusion that an object falling from infinity would take an infinite amount of time to reach Earth. However, the analysis shifts to consider dropping the mass from a finite height, resulting in a different equation that allows for a finite fall time. The final takeaway emphasizes that while falling from an infinite distance results in infinite time, any finite drop will occur in a finite duration. The mathematical exploration validates these conclusions through derived equations and integrations.
nos
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
Heey everyone,

I was wondering how long it takes for a small mass to reach the Earth from infinity . The trajectory is completely radial, so it's a relatively simple equation.

$$r''(t ) =\frac{ - GM} {r(t)^2}. $$

But what if we multiplied both sides by ##2r'(t) ##. Then it follows,

$$2r'(t) r''(t ) =\frac{ - 2GM} {r(t)^2}r'(t).$$ $$ \implies \frac{d} {dt} (r'(t) ^2) =\frac{ - 2GM} {r(t)^2}r'(t).$$

Integrate with respect to t from t=t to t=##\infty##. and $$r'(\infty) =0 $$ and ##r(\infty) =\infty##.

$$ r'(\infty) ^2 - r'(t) ^2 =\frac{2GM} {r(\infty)} -\frac{2GM} {r(t)} $$, leaving with $$r(t)r'(t) ^2 =2 GM$$
Which has general solution:
$$r(t) =(3/2) ^{(2/3)} (C+\sqrt{2GM}t)^{(2/3)} $$.
Letting ##r(0)=R## we can determine C, that is ##C=2/3R^{(3/2)}##.

So our trajectory from Earth to infinity is given by:
$$r(t) =(3/2)^{(2/3)} [(2/3)R^{(3/2)}+\sqrt{2GM}t] ^{(2 /3)}$$
Differentiating gives:
$$r'(t) =(3/2)^{(2/3)}\frac{2 \sqrt{2GM}}{3(\sqrt{2GM}t+2R^{(3/2) } /3)^{(1/3)}} $$ $$ r'(0)= \sqrt{\frac{2GM}{R}}$$. Which validates the escape velocity.

I approached the problem by shooting the mass from the Earth to infinity and now I have come to the conclusion that it takes infinite amount of time.. Oops.

I suppose dropping it from any given height will give:
$$r'(t) ^2 =\frac{2GM}{r(t)}-\frac{2GM}{b} $$ where b is the height we are dropping it from.

Then $$b\pi/2 -\sqrt{2GM/b}t=b\tan^{-1}(\sqrt{\frac{r(t)}{b-r(t)}})-\sqrt{r(t)(b-r(t))}$$.

Then for ##t=t_{final} ## we must have ##r(t_{final}) =R##. Then the time can be determined how long the fall would take from b to R.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
An object falls from any finite distance in a finite time. Mathematically, as the distance tends to infinity, so does the time.
 
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?
Let there be a person in a not yet optimally designed sled at h meters in height. Let this sled free fall but user can steer by tilting their body weight in the sled or by optimal sled shape design point it in some horizontal direction where it is wanted to go - in any horizontal direction but once picked fixed. How to calculate horizontal distance d achievable as function of height h. Thus what is f(h) = d. Put another way, imagine a helicopter rises to a height h, but then shuts off all...
Back
Top