lacgibra

lacgibra t1_ixw0h05 wrote

Well yeah Newton's doesn't explain Mercury's precession. I were sticking the context of the questioner and I had mentioned defining it classically, you need to think what it is when required. You can't just tell all the concepts that neglected friction, air resistance are wrong, for the classical assumption gravity has to be assumed as force. Relativity got better explanation apsidal precession and all at the end of the day approximately g = 9.81 m/s². Not lower than that or higher than that.

3

lacgibra t1_ixvevls wrote

The comment above still fits, You can obtain mass of the earth by doing the simple pendulum method to obtain g from the equation √g = 2π√L/T

g = earth's gravity L = length of the pendulum T = time period

Note that simple pendulum give adequate answers for small angles only, if you swing the pendulum to wide you won't br arriving at the earth's gravity.

then equate it with g = GM/r²

9

lacgibra t1_ixue9eg wrote

Are you speaking about Newton's law of gravitation? It's used to obtain force of attraction between two planets or it's satellites, which is deduced from f_g = G m_1 m_2/r²

f_g is force of attraction,

G is universal gravitational constant

m_1 mass of the planet

m_2 mass of the other planet

r is distance between them.

The above problem is otherwise called two body problem as well which turns into complicate when you apply classical mechanics

The formula for gravity of the planet obtained from the above equation as folloing as

We know that f = mg and also f = GmM/r²

Here g is gravity due to acceleration G is gravitational constant. m is mass of the object in the earth. M is mass of the earth.

Since the object is bound to the planet the r distance between them would be radius of the planet itself Thus r is radius of the earth

mg = GmM/r²

And you get g = GM/r²

I would suggest you to look into two body problem and barycentre you might find it relevant.

36