Questions   
Sort: 
 #1
avatar+12530 
+1
Jul 7, 2017
 #2
avatar+26400 
0

How far away would light have to be from a black hole with the mass of the Earth (6 x 1024 kg)

in order to be able to escape from its gravitational pull?

(Note: use the formula for escape speed again: vesc = 1.15 × 10-5 MR−−√MR )

 

Let speed of light \(c = 3\cdot 10^8\ \frac{m}{s}\)

Let gravitational constant \( = G \) \( \)

Let Radius = R

 

\(\begin{array}{|rcll|} \hline v_{esc} &=& \sqrt{\frac{2 G M_{\text{Earth}} }{R} } \\ v_{esc} &=& \sqrt{2 G} \times \sqrt{\frac{ M_{\text{Earth}} }{R} } \quad & | \quad \sqrt{2 G} \approx 1.15 \cdot 10^{-5} \\ v_{esc} &=& 1.15 \cdot 10^{-5} \times \sqrt{\frac{ M_{\text{Earth}} }{R} } \quad & | \quad v_{esc} = c \\ c &=& 1.15 \cdot 10^{-5} \times \sqrt{\frac{ M_{\text{Earth}} }{R} } \\ c^2 &=& 1.15^2 \cdot (10^{-5})^2 \cdot \frac{ M_{\text{Earth}} }{R} \\ R &=& 1.15^2 \cdot (10^{-5})^2 \cdot \frac{ M_{\text{Earth}} }{c^2} \quad & | \quad M_{\text{Earth}} = 6 \cdot 10^{24}\ kg \qquad c = 3\cdot 10^8\ \frac{m}{s} \\ &=& 1.15^2 \cdot (10^{-5})^2 \cdot \frac{ 6 \cdot 10^{24} }{(3\cdot 10^8)^2} \\ &=& 1.15^2 \cdot 10^{-10} \cdot \frac{ 6 \cdot 10^{24} }{ 9\cdot 10^{16} } \\ &=& 1.15^2 \cdot 10^{-10} \cdot \frac{2}{3} \cdot 10^{(24-16)} \\ &=& 1.15^2 \cdot \frac{2}{3} \cdot 10^{(24-16-10)} \\ &=& 0.88167 \cdot 10^{-2} \ m \\ &=& 8.8167 \cdot 10^{-3} \ m \\ &=& 8.817 \ mm \\\\ \mathbf{R} & \mathbf{ \approx }& \mathbf{ 8.8 \ mm } \\ \hline \end{array} \)

 

The light would have to be more than \(\mathbf{8.8 \ mm}\) from the black hole with the mass of the Earth

in order to be able to escape from its gravitational pull

 

laugh

Jul 7, 2017
Jul 6, 2017
 #3
avatar+2446 
+1

Actually, another method involves knowing relationships of right triangles. This particular triangle is an isosceles right triangle. It's an isosceles triangle because of the tick marks in the diagram. By the definition of the isosceles triangle theorem, the angles opposite the congruent sides are congruent.

 

However, we already know one of the sides is a right angle, or 90 degrees. Let's solve for the missing angles:

 

Let alpha = the measure of the unknown angle

 

\(90+2\alpha=180\)Triangle Sum Theorem
\(2\alpha=90\)Subtraction Property of Equality
\(\alpha=45^{\circ}\)Division Property of Equality
  


Look at that! The missing angles are both 45 degrees? Is that useful? Yes, it is, actually. Because we have proven that the other angles are 45 degrees, we can utilize the 45-45-90 triangle relationships!

 

Remember that in a 45-45-90 triangle, the ratio of the legs to the legs to the hypotenuse is \(1:1:\sqrt{2}\)

 

Now, knowing this, let's figure out x.

 

\(x\sqrt{2}=8.1\)As aforementioned, the ratio of the leg to the leg to the hypotenuse in a 45-45-90 triangle is \(1:1:\sqrt{2}\). Divide by the square root of 2.
\(x=\frac{8.1}{\sqrt{2}}*\frac{\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{2}}\)Although you do not technically have do this for this problem, I'll rationalize this fraction.
\(x=\frac{8.1\sqrt{2}}{2}cm\approx5.728cm\)

I rounded to 3 decimal places.

 

I seem to like this method better because it does not require nearl as much work, but both are valid methods of solving. However, I would agree that it is easy to default to Pythagorean Theorem in right triangles. 

 #2
avatar
+1
Jul 6, 2017

2 Online Users

avatar