Why Does Thrust Differ for Objects of Different Mass in Space?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DarkElfa
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mass Thrust
AI Thread Summary
Thrust requirements differ for objects of varying mass in space due to Newton's third law, which states that force equals mass times acceleration (F=ma). While both objects are weightless in space, their mass still resists acceleration, meaning a more massive object requires more thrust to achieve the same acceleration as a lighter one. The amount of force applied will move both a 1-pound and a 1-ton object, but the acceleration of the heavier object will be significantly lower. Thus, mass plays a crucial role in determining how quickly an object can be accelerated, regardless of the absence of gravity. Understanding this principle is essential for comprehending motion in a weightless environment.
DarkElfa
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I've always wondered about something. If there is no gravity or resistance in space, than why does it take more thrust to move a 1 ton object than a 1 pound object. Shouldn't thy both both be equally easy to move since neither has any weight in space?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Even though they may be weightless, they still have mass. Newton's third law is F=ma, therefore to accelerate the same amount, a more massive object requires more thrust (force).
 
Why does mass matter if it doesn't have weight?
 
Mass is the resistance to acceleration. Weight is only the way in which gravity effects (and is effected by) mass, but mass resists acceleration whether there is gravity or not.

Also, the same amount of force will move a 1-pound object and[i/] a 1-ton object in space; it just won't move the 1-ton object nearly as fast.
 
Is a homemade radio telescope realistic? There seems to be a confluence of multiple technologies that makes the situation better than when I was a wee lad: software-defined radio (SDR), the easy availability of satellite dishes, surveillance drives, and fast CPUs. Let's take a step back - it is trivial to see the sun in radio. An old analog TV, a set of "rabbit ears" antenna, and you're good to go. Point the antenna at the sun (i.e. the ears are perpendicular to it) and there is...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
How does light maintain enough energy in the visible part of the spectrum for the naked eye to see in the night sky. Also, how did it start of in the visible frequency part of the spectrum. Was it, for example, photons being ejected at that frequency after high energy particle interaction. Or does the light become visible (spectrum) after hitting our atmosphere or space dust or something? EDIT: Actually I just thought. Maybe the EM starts off as very high energy (outside the visible...
Back
Top