What is the time taken to reach a given height with escape velocity?

AI Thread Summary
Launching an object at escape velocity from Earth's surface leads to complex calculations for the time taken to reach a specific height. While near the surface, gravity can be treated as constant, escape velocity requires consideration of gravitational force diminishing with distance, described by the equation F = -GMm/r^2. This necessitates using quadrature and integrating the resulting expressions, which relate kinetic and potential energy. The integration results in an elliptic integral, known to be non-integrable in elementary terms but tabulated for practical use. Ultimately, starting at escape velocity simplifies the integral, allowing for easier computation of the time to reach the desired height.
Gazarai
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
If an object is launched at escape velocity from the surface of the Earth, how long will it take to reach a given height h? Ignoring air resistance and other gravity, etc.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That sounds like a pretty basic problem but it isn't, quite. For motion near the surface of the earth, we could take the acceleration due to gravity to be constant, -g. But if you are talking about "escape velocity" you must be considering the object moving to great distance compared to the radius of the earth. Then F= -GmM/r^2 where G is the "universal gravitational constant", m is the mass of the object, M is the mass of the earth, and r is the distance from the center of the earth, so that the acceleration is -GM/r^2.

That gives a= dv/dt= -GM/r^2. Since the variables on the left are "v" and "t" while we have "r" on the right (and v= dr/dt), we can use a technique called "quadrature". Since a= dv/dt= (dv/dr)(dr/dt) (by the "chain rule") a= (dv/dr)(dr/dt)= (dv/dr)v= -GM/r^2. We can write that as v dv= (-GM/r^2)dr.


Integrating (1/2)v^2= GM/r+ C (That, by the way, is "conservation of energy"- the left is kinetic energy, the right is the negative of the potential energy, and there difference is constant). Then we have v^2= 2GM/r+ C so that v= dr/dt= \sqrt{2GM/r+ C}.

Now, we need to integrate \frac{dr}{\sqrt{2GM/r+ C}}= dt.

The left side is an "elliptic integral" (from the fact that it is related to calculating the orbits of planets and satellites which are ellipses), well known NOT to be integrable in terms of elementary functions but well tabulated.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes 1 person
If you start at scape velocity, than the constant C vanishes (Which is just the total mechanical energy) vanishes and the integral can be easily performed.
 
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?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top