Kepler provided a kinematic description of orbits: his laws describe the shape of a planet's motion around the Sun, and allow one to calculate its position as a function of time. In a way, Kepler did for orbital motion what Galileo did for projectile motion; he put it in mathematical terms. But what Kepler (and Galileo) did not do was to explain why. Why should orbits be ellipses? Why should a planet move faster when it is closer to the Sun?
Newton answered the "why" by setting forth a few simple rules of dynamics: the interaction between objects, their motion, and the forces which act upon them. Recall Newton's three laws of motion:
F = m * a
To these rules, Newton added one more which was especially useful in the celestial realm, where the dominant force between objects is gravity.
m1 * m2 F = G ------- r^2
It is possible to start with Newton's postulates and derive Kepler's three laws; see Section 2.3 of your textbook. Let's keep Newton's laws in mind as we examine the properties of real and reduced-mass orbits: forces, energies, angular momenta.
Look at the example I handed out in class last week: two masses, m1 = 6 and m1 = 1, moving around their common center of mass in circular orbits.
Consider the gravitational force between these two bodies. Please express all your answers to the questions below so that they are in terms of the small mass m2 and its distance r2 away from the center of mass.
One can calculate the equivalent reduced-mass system, in which a small mass μ orbits around a stationary large mass M = m1 + m2. For the reduced-mass case,
Apparently, the reduced-mass orbit has the same gravitational force as the real orbit. How nice.
The kinetic energy of a system is simply the sum over all the bodies of
1 2 KE = --- m * v 2
Again look at the example with mass ratio 6:1 and circular orbits.
Suppose that the period of the orbit is P. Please express all your answers to the questions below so that they are in terms of the small mass m2 and its distance r2 away from the center of mass.
One can calculate the equivalent reduced-mass system, in which a small mass μ orbits around a stationary large mass M = m1 + m2. For the reduced-mass case,
Apparently, the reduced-mass orbit has the same total kinetic energy as the real orbit. How nice.
The gravitational potential energy of a system is the sum over all PAIRS of bodies of
m1 * m2 GPE = - G --------- r
Consider again the example of two bodies with mass ratio 6:1. Please express all your answers to the questions below so that they are in terms of the small mass m2 and its distance r2 away from the center of mass.
One can calculate the equivalent reduced-mass system, in which a small mass μ orbits around a stationary large mass M = m1 + m2. For the reduced-mass case,
Apparently, the reduced-mass orbit has the same gravitational potential energy as the real orbit.
The angular momentum of a body in a circular orbit is
L = m * v * r
Consider again the example of two bodies with mass ratio 6:1. Please express all your answers to the questions below so that they are in terms of the small mass m2 and its distance r2 away from the center of mass.
One can calculate the equivalent reduced-mass system, in which a small mass μ orbits around a stationary large mass M = m1 + m2. For the reduced-mass case,
Apparently, the reduced-mass orbit has the same angular momentum as the real orbit.
The bottom line is that many of the interesting physical properties of the REAL orbital system turn out to be identical to the computed properties of the REDUCED-MASS system. That suggests that we can
In other words, it gives us confidence that we can use the measurements to derive the quantities of interest -- especially the mass of the stars.
Copyright © Michael Richmond. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.