What's the proof that R2 /(R+h) = (1 – 2h/R)

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Karagoz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity Proof
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the derivation of the formula for acceleration due to gravity at height h, expressed as g1 = g (1 – 2h/R). The key transformation involves manipulating the ratio R²/(R+h)² into the form 1/(1 + h/R)², which simplifies to (1 + h/R)⁻². This simplification relies on the assumption that h is much smaller than R, allowing for a Taylor series expansion that retains only the first-order term in h/R. This mathematical approach is essential for understanding gravitational acceleration variations at altitude.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of gravitational acceleration and its mathematical representation
  • Familiarity with Taylor series expansions in calculus
  • Basic knowledge of algebraic manipulation of fractions
  • Concept of limits and approximations in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Taylor series expansion techniques in calculus
  • Explore gravitational acceleration variations with height using physics textbooks
  • Learn about the implications of the small angle approximation in physics
  • Investigate the derivation of gravitational formulas in classical mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching gravitational concepts, and anyone interested in mathematical derivations related to gravitational acceleration.

Karagoz
Messages
51
Reaction score
5
TL;DR
When proving formula for acceleration due to gravity at height h – with derivation, there are some steps I don't understand.
Hi,

On this link: https://physicsteacher.in/2020/07/1...n-due-to-gravity-at-height-h-with-derivation/

They prove the formula for acceleration due to gravity at height h, which is: g1 = g (1 – 2h/R).

There are similar articles online.

When they go through the last steps, it shows something like this:

g1/g = R2 /(R+h)2

= 1/(1 + h/R)2 = (1 + h/R)-2 = (1 – 2h/R)

But I don't understand, how does one move from R^2 /(R+h)^2 to 1/(1 + h/R)^2 = (1 + h/R)^-2 and then to (1 – 2h/R)

Could someone explain what's happening there?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The first step is simply to divide both numerator and denominator by R^2. In the second step, they have assumed that h<<R, so h/R <<1. You can then do a Taylor series expansion and keep only the first term in h/R.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Karagoz and berkeman

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K