Understanding Orbital Motion with Polar Coordinates

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the complexities of describing orbital motion using polar coordinates (r, θ) in a rotating reference frame. The equation of motion includes a radial force term, F(r) = m(¨r - r˙θ²), which raises questions about the negative centrifugal force term. It is clarified that the centrifugal force, which acts outward, is considered positive, while the gravitational force acts inward, leading to a need for equilibrium in the rotating frame. The confusion arises from interpreting the forces involved, particularly how the negative term relates to the gravitational attraction. Ultimately, the equation can be understood as balancing the centrifugal force and gravitational force to explain the observed acceleration in the rotating frame.
andrevdh
Messages
2,126
Reaction score
116
I'm a bit unclear about the description of orbital motion in a plane by using the polar coordinates (r,\theta). This coordinate system changes its orientation in the inertial reference frame, that it is rotating as the orbiting object moves along its path. In the derivation of the equations of motion the radial part comes to
F(r)=m(\ddot r\ -\ r\dot \theta^2)
My problem is that in a rotating reference system it is normally necessary to introduce a centrifugal force F_C, which sorts of explains the second term in the equation above since the centrifugal force is given as
F_C=mr\dot \theta^2
Why is the term then negative in the top equation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Doesn't the centrifugal force act in the opposite direction to the centripital force?
 
Centrifugal force is in an opposite direction to the centripental force \vec{F_C}=-\vec{F_r}[/color]
 
That is exactly my problem since for orbital motion the gravitational attractive force is in the negative \vec r direction amounting to
F(r)=-G\frac{Mm}{r^2}
which is a bit confusing, unless the term in the equation of motion should not be interpreted as arising from the centrifugal force.
 
The negative force is to keep the body in equilibrium in the rotating frame. The centrifugal force exerted away from the centre by the body is taken as positive direction. Unless an internal attraction the body cannot continue uniform orbital motion.
 
Here is how I think the equation might be interpreted
-F_G=m\ddot r\ -\ F_C
thus
m\ddot r\ =\ F_C\ -\ F_G
the term m\ddot r is the acceleration an observer in the rotating frame of reference observes. He explains it as a result of two forces the centrifugal F_C and the attractive gravitational F_G?
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top