[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/sci/ - Science and Mathematics

Spending thousands of dollars on useless labs since 2014.

Catalog

8chan Bitcoin address: 1NpQaXqmCBji6gfX8UgaQEmEstvVY7U32C
The next generation of Infinity is here (discussion) (contribute)
A message from @CodeMonkeyZ, 2ch lead developer: "How Hiroyuki Nishimura will sell 4chan data"
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


Oh, hey. We're actually having old posts pruned now.

File: 1437598638332.jpg (627.71 KB, 1000x625, 8:5, oh_noes.jpg)

 No.2832

Okay there was this dude on the interwebz who was like:

>if you're stranded 10 meters away from the ISS… wouldnt it pull you in, with gravity?

So i was like "sure, maybe i can calculate how long it would take to pull you back".

But I've spent hours with this and i think i still have wrong answer.

So yeah, I KNOW THIS IS WRONG, BUT I DON'T KNOW IN WHICH PART I'VE MADE MISTAKE.

Pls help red /sci/onymous.

At first i thought it will be simple:

I'm just going to take equation for gravitational force F = G * ( m1 * m2 / r^2) and then you put this force into newton's second law of motion a = F / m and then calculate the time by using t = sqrt (2s / a)

But then i realized that it would be inaccurate, because as you get closer that gravitational force between you and space station would increase.

I can't do any higher level mathematics for solving this accurately, so i cheated. I said: Let's make it much more accurate by dividing this path into more chunks, calculate everything for those chunks separately and then add those times together. It is cheating but it's best i can do.

Problem is that i don't know if i used enough of these segments.

And another big problem is that ISS is not just mass point, but it has some volume and as you get closer the gravitational force disperse to the sides. I have not accounted for that.

Also i didn't count gravitational pull the other way that you have on ISS, because i've tried to calculate it and it looks negligible.

So this is only rough approximation.

The mass of ISS is about 450t according to wikipedia. Let's say your mass is 80kg. Gravitational constant is 6,67·10^-11 [of bullshit units].

Also we must assume there is absolutely 0 relative velocity between you and ISS.

First segment:

F = k * ( m1 * m2 / r^2)

F = 6,67*10^-11 * ((450 000 * 80) / 10^2)

F = 0.000024012 N

a = F / m

a = 0.000024012 / 80

a = 3.0015*10^-7

t = sqrt (2s / a)

h will be 2m because second segment will be 8m so we calcullate it only for 2m

t = sqrt (2*2 / 3.0015*10^-7)

t = 3650.57 s

Second segment:

F = 6,67*10^-11 * ((450 000 * 80) / 8^2)

F = 0.00003751875

a = F / m

a = 0.00003751875 / 80

a = 0.000000468984375

third segment will be 5m se we calculate only (8-5) m = 3m

But there is a problem: we already have some velocity, so i can't use t = sqrt (2s / a).

I think i should use this formula s = v0 * t + 0,5 * a*(t^2) and somehow get t from it.

And v0 calculate as v = v0(of previous segment) + a * t

v0 of previuos segment is in this case 0 but in the next segment it should be this v0

I'll be honest, i cheated and used this online calculators:

http://planetcalc.com/981/

and

http://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/physics/velocity_a_t.php

And this is what i got:

v0 = 0.0010957185855 m/s

t = 1935.89 s

Third segment:

F = 6,67*10^-11 * (36000000 / 5^2)

F = 0.000096048

a = 0.000096048 / 80

a = 0.0000012006

Next segment is 2m so we put here (5-2) = 3m

Time for online calculator again…

v0 = 0.0020036207472187

t = 1120.87 s

4th segment:

F = 6,67*10^-11 * (36000000 / 2^2)

F = 0.0006003

a = 0.0006003 / 80

a = 0.00000750375

length of segment is 2 - 1 = 1

Calc time…

v0 = 0.0033493372692187

t = 236.12 s

5th segment:

F = 6,67*10^-11 * (36000000 / 1^2)

F = 0.0024012

a = 0.0024012 / 80

a = 0.000030015

length is 1 - 0,5 = 0,5

now calc

v0 = 0.0051211227192187

t = 79.24 s

6th segment

F = 6,67*10^-11 * (36000000 / 0,5^2)

F = 0.0096048

a = 0.0096048 / 80

a = 0.00012006

length 0,5 because that is final segment

calc pls

v0 = 0.0074995113192187

t = 48.13 s

Now just add up all times together and bam 48.13 + 79.24 + 236.12 + 1120.87 + 1935.89 + 3650.57 = 7070.82 s

7070.82s = 117.847 min = almost 2 hours

But this doesn't make a sense. Only 2 hours is a bullshit.

So what the heck did i do wrong?

I know, you can solve this with your high level math, but i would appritiate if someone use the same method as me and tell me in which part i failed.

 No.2834

>Only 2 hours is a bullshit.

Not really.

There's this thing called the Cavenish experiment, where you measure the gravitational constant by observing the gravitational pull between two free-hanging masses in a laboratory.

Despite the masses used being on a kilogram scale, and distances on decimetre scale, they will attract each other with a force that causes them to oscillate at a period on a minutes scale.

So by the rule of the thumb I'd say your calculation is actually correct — though, you'd also have to take into account the starting velocity. You assumed that at the beginning, the astronaut is stationary in ISS frame of reference, but in reality, this won't happen and he'll slowly drift away in several minutes before the gravitational interaction can produce observable effects.


 No.2840

>>2832

>Let's make it much more accurate by dividing this path into more chunks, calculate everything for those chunks separately and then add those times together.

Congratulations, anon, you just graduated into Calculus. Welcome to the world of numerical integration.

Now that you've moved into numerical integration, I would recommend an Explicit Embedded Runge-Kutta method:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Runge%E2%80%93Kutta_methods#Embedded_methods

My question about you result is the Earth: how does it effect things? I'm with the other anon, 2 hrs sounds right, as the gravitational force is EXTREMELY weak. However, the Earth is EXTREMELY large whan compared to both our Astronaut and the ISS.


 No.2841

>>2832

So, anon, I have a ballistic propagator at my disposal. I quickly coded up your question and ran it with 4th Order Runge-Kutta integration at time steps of 0.1, 0.01, and 0.001 seconds. All of them took a hair over 6408 seconds (about 1 hour and 45 minutes).

Note: the termination criteria for the simulation was that the ballistically propagated object reached within .1 m of the origin. At that point, you would be inside the station.


 No.2870

>>2841

Badass


 No.2876

File: 1438488435025.png (1.45 MB, 2000x1975, 80:79, aeiou.png)

This was a really nice thread to read. 10/10


 No.2878

File: 1438596895872.jpg (141.59 KB, 600x584, 75:73, 1308479469892.jpg)

>>2834

>>2840

>>2841

OP here. Thanks for the replies. Appreciated.


 No.2879

>>2832

solved for r = ∫∫a dt, where a = G*m/r^2, and solved for t = ~329 seconds(less than an hour). Since the ISS isn't a singularity you acn expect your results to be closer to a few days in real life.


 No.2880

>>2879

>Since the ISS isn't a singularity you acn expect your results to be closer to a few days in real life.

that's not how physics works, at least to the radius of longest axis of ISS it will be almost the same as if it were




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]