How Fast do you Need to Go to Escape Earth's Orbit?

Check out more predictions on Earth 2050 at clik.cc/8GCid ! :)
Handcrafted products, puzzles and more :0 stemerch.eu/co...
inFiMuM Merch! :D stemerch.eu/co...
Varying Mass: • Mass can't be Time Dep...
Rocket Equation: • The Rocket Equation fe...
Connection Force and Potential: • Conservation of energy...
Today we are going to derive the Escape Velocity for arbitrary Planets using simple conservation of Energy :) Enjoy! =D
Help me create more free content! =)
stemerch.com/
/ mathable
papaflammy.myt...
Merch :v - papaflammy.myt...
www.amazon.com...
shop.spreadshi...
Become a Member of the Flammily! :0 / @papaflammy69
2nd Channel: / @npcooking69
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wanna send me some stuff? lel:
Postfach 11 15
06731 Bitterfeld-Wolfen
Saxony-Anhalt
Germany
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Twitter: / flammablemaths
Instagram: / uncomfortably_cursed_m...
Flammy's subreddit: / flammybois
Facebook: / flammablemaths
Want to know more about me? Watch my QnA! =D • Question and Answer Ti...

[@PapaFlammy69]

*_Joe momma loves dem rockets :^D_* If you did liek today's video, make sure to like the video and comment

[@oni8337]

yes

[@anshulrai677]

Nice If you wanna leave earth just sit on a bomb.🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@hellsowner8513]

HOW DID YOU GET THESE EMOJISSSSSS ????!!!

[@hellsowner8513]

C'mon tell us instead of just giving a heart 🥺🥺🥺

[@PapaFlammy69]

You have to become a channel member^^

[@luggepytt]

I calculated the escape velocity of Yo Mama, assuming M = 100 kg and r = 1 m, and got v = 0.115 mm/s. It feels much harder in real life...

[@g-pechmann5238]

You‘re joking, right?

[@someguy4003]

@@g-pechmann5238 he is absolutely not joking.

[@That_One_Guy...]

@@g-pechmann5238 it's like lifting the heaviest weight in Olympics, what you talking about ?

[@howardlam6181]

damnn, you have a thicc mom

[@mudkip_btw]

Your underestimation of the mass might explain the anomaly

[@AndrewDotsonvideos]

Get a load of THIS guy, would ya?

[@gamingstars8956]

No

[@PapaFlammy69]

ya?

[@kathanshah8305]

Wasn’t he underage or something

[@Noam_.Menashe]

No.

[@beny874]

In before Andrews break down of the twiolkovsky rocket equation.

[@ricardoparada5375]

This is a nice refresher. I haven’t seen escape velocity in quite a while

[@PapaFlammy69]

Glad it helped :3

[@az0rs]

“So it’s never about how heavy it is!”. Welcome to Physics.

[@mskiptr]

Hmm, but what if we tried to calculate the escape velocity from something like a human where the escaping object would be Earth? We would get some extremely small number, that didn't account for the fact that the human would be pulled together with the Earth which would also don't allow it's gravitational influence to decrease

[@jonaszurba4906]

"The total energy of the system can be positive or negative, doesn't really matter.... actually, it has to be positive since this is classical mechanics, so let E=0" ... 10/10

[@mkjaiswal11]

People: We will escape Earth some day Flammable Math: *ESCAPE YOUR MOTHER*

[@zorzeus]

As an astrophysicist (soon, a new one) I find this both useful and optimally explained. As always, you are real deal 🔥

[@PapaFlammy69]

:)

[@FGj-xj7rd]

You have been making papa Newton proud recently.

[@PapaFlammy69]

[@NateROCKS112]

Well, besides Newton initially trying his hardest to discredit Leibniz's "vis vitae" conservation law. (Leibniz saw that mv^2 is seemingly conserved.)

[@sharpnova2]

only .03% of Chinese IMO gold medalists were able to solve this. I'm presh tellwalker and this is mind your decisions. thank you for helping to make my channel the most clickbaity channel in existence

[@cynodont7391]

I think that at the very end, the negative escape velocity is also a valid answer ... kind of. Think about it. With a negative velocity, the rocket falls toward the center of the planet Assuming that it goes through because (insert stupid reason here), it will arrive at the antipodal point with the same 'positive' velocity and from there it will escape in the other direction.

[@Browl22LPs]

Or you just made a sign error when calculating the potential as F has to be negative (as it points towards the planet)

[@mudkip_btw]

Well... Under the assumption that the earth is represented by an -1/r² potential well, going through the origin results in infinite energies. That's kinda bad. But yeah still you're kind of right

[@cynodont7391]

@@mudkip_btw No infinite needed because inside a sphere, the mass above you has no gravitational effect. See the shell theorem. The potential well is actually proportional to M/r² where M is the mass 'below' you. When r>R (the planet radius), M ~= 4πR³/3 is constant ( = the mass of the whole planet) but when r

[@neilgerace355]

PF: Let's call it Joe. Sammy Davis Jr: Can he do that? Dean Martin: He can do that.

[@mineblox2313]

How to escape Earth's orbit Kids : go 11.2km/sec and you will escape Men : basically u need to go fast Legends : **star wars theme**

[@fuji_films]

[ERROR] - HUMORISM NOT DETECTED

[@RC32Smiths01]

Really interesting and scientific approach here!

[@Canadianishere]

Wouldn't the rocket come back since there is a gravitational force pulling it back no matter what, like if you give it billions of years.

[@PapaFlammy69]

For r->infty the gravitational well vanishes

[@thekingofgindio]

Well, the fact is that the rocket will either "abandon" Joe's gravitational pull or enter Joe's orbit, which means that it will be in a constant fall

[@noelsiony6265]

I wish I had you as my teacher during intro physics years ago. You would have made that class so much simpler

[@PapaFlammy69]

[@vwabi]

Him: "We are just going to call this planet Joe" Me: "He can't keep getting away with it! He can't keep getting away with it."

[@megauser8512]

LOL!

[@violascrinzi4081]

Very nice video! I remember my Physics teacher in the third year of highschool asking me the same question as in the title of the video and it turned out to be a totally unexpected oral test (two days before the end of the schoolyear) xD Als Randbemerkung: please remember to feed the poor Andrew Dotson down in the basement

[@PapaFlammy69]

Will do :^)

[@omkarchakraborty1739]

No one: Captain Mathematics:

[@shubhmishra2158]

For all the smart people shouting 11.2 km/s , the given planet isn’t Earth so neither the mass nor the radius should be considered the same. Anyways, I wanted to ask that if the decreasing mass of the rocket was to be considered then how would we calculate the change in mass, I mean since mass is a independent quantity it doesn’t really have a formula so how would we be integrating it, and what would the upper limit and lower limit for integration. I think we could use mass dilation formula Mo = M/(sqrt)(1-v^2/c^2), but I don’t think it would work since technically the system isn’t losing mass as particle but rather as fuel.

[@7rgrov198]

The mass cancels out. The escape velocity is constant wrt mass of the object escaping

[@shubhmishra2158]

@@7rgrov198 oh! Ok

[@Skyrim279]

In my physics 1 class i think we compared the initial vs final energy and see what happens when r goes to infinity

[@PapaFlammy69]

yup! But the velocity at infinty is counterintuitive af

[@laurynastruskauskas6586]

I love these physics derivations, keep doing them i recently derived the path of the ball when you throw it with some force and angle and there is some wind in either of the directions you get x(of ball)=f(t) and y(of ball)=g(t) and then you can make it such that t=h(x) and then y=g(h(x))... i know its kind of funny that time depends on x. My summer is cringe i have nothing left to do and i started implimenting air resistanse. If it looks sad and like my life is useless its because it is. School is boring and will be for the next 3years but i hope university will be more interesting. P.s. you need some differential equation to do the calculation which was interesting cuz it was my first tike doing those.

[@PapaFlammy69]

:)

[@abdqs853]

Woh, that's some next level shit. I've been trying to derive this for a years but without successe (though this year I didn't bother to try)

[@veralgupta8182]

11.2 km/s theoretically Thanks to jee physics

[@toniokettner4821]

your shirt should be: INFIME supreme - supremum infime - infimum

[@TrimutiusToo]

Suddenly

[@connorarmstrong9998]

I'd be interested to see what displacement over time looks like when the kinetic = potential for this problem

[@Chiwiwi-k2h]

Flammable maths: Launch a shoe into space. Asian parents: *HOLD MA BEER*

[@garvett6660]

Just noticed my spaceship looks like a giant cannelloni

[@ShadowZZZ]

you could have also taken a minute to plug in the values for M,r for earth to calculate a v_e = 11.2 km/s

[@jorgelenny47]

Brings memories of my physics teacher who explained this. He was so based

[@pratyushbhattarai5632]

Yo, I thought this was flammable maths 2 cause papa doing Ez stuff

[@antoine5571]

Oh nice, some physic video 😁

[@isuckatcodm3638]

"it does not matter if E is positive or negative in our case *pauses * energy has to be positive..." The best quote ever

[@InexorableVideos]

And then he makes it 0 anyway haha

[@mudkip_btw]

Next up: advanced aerodynamics modelling of rocket launches, a complete course

[@mudkip_btw]

Why an improper integral tho that's a little bit bruh

[@vdinh143]

Am I going crazy or is there background music from Dark Cloud 2 OST playing in the video?

[@PapaFlammy69]

yasssssss :)

[@neilgerace355]

Here's my prediction: in 2050, the paperless office will be five years away, and fusion power will be here in 20 years.

[@PapaFlammy69]

nice. You posted it on the site?

[@neilgerace355]

@@PapaFlammy69 yes

[@lordnavjot5921]

you have an amazing accent!

[@PapaFlammy69]

Thx :p

[@TheScienceGuy10]

@@PapaFlammy69 So does joe mamma

[@r3drummurd3r68]

This RICHARD. JOHNSON head is a reason I dropped out of school is the reason.

[@einsteingonzalez4336]

What happened to your second channel?

[@PapaFlammy69]

On hold for now, no time to manage it currently :(

[@kathanshah8305]

@@PapaFlammy69 ah yes woodworking

[@ahmedfayad1606]

Who's joe ?

[@kathanshah8305]

*How’s joe

[@ciarfah]

@@kathanshah8305 Whose Joe?

[@coolrockerify34]

why is joe?

[@luggepytt]

At first I thought he said "Let's call this planet Geo".

[@DonCherrysDream]

Joe mama

[@rinay9558]

Rocket science 🚀 NiCe

[@jennykeeling3716]

This makes much more sense now 👍👌🏼

[@PapaFlammy69]

=)

[@phyarth8082]

Shwarzchild radius and escape velocity of light from black hole, blunder of astrophysics :) Based on classical mechanics derivation of escape velocity.

[@rheticus5198]

I agree. Try this doc 2007.0009 at the viXra dot org site. "Composition of Relativistic Gravitational Potential Energy" by Colin Walker. Abstract: A relativistic composition of gravitational redshift can be implemented using the Volterra product integral. Using this composition as a model, expressions are developed for gravitational potential energy, escape velocity, and a metric. Each of these expressions alleviates a perceived defect in its conventional counterpart. Unlike current theory, relativistic gravitational potential energy would be limited to rest energy (Machian), escape velocity resulting from the composition would be limited to the speed of light, and the associated metric would be singularity-free. These ideal properties warrant investigation, at a foundational level, into relativistic compositions based on product integration.

[@of8155]

I really love your ascent😘😘😘😘

[@nj8245]

I wonder who this planet is named after...

[@dorian4387]

Pls derive for UrAnus, we need to know

[@giacomorapisardi877]

Just a small note, the force is the negative gradient of the potential energy, so there should be a minus sign before the integral and another on the force as well, but I mean who cares stupid minus signs

[@jongrayson2364]

v = √2GM/r, but ig law of conservation of energy is used to calculate this to make more sense innit papa flammy?

[@joshuajackson7691]

So to leave earths orbit, straight up is the goal correct? Or do rockets travel horizontally prior to leaving orbit?

[@mrhatman675]

You should have used einsteins general relativity

[@PapaFlammy69]

yeye, ez

[@mrhatman675]

@@PapaFlammy69 now you can make a video about the same concept but taking into account the fact that the rocket pulls the planet joe tarwards it with gravity

[@mskiptr]

Rel: Assuming F= GMm/r² for point-like objects, how can we be sure we can reliably use it for something bigger? Turns out, we actually can't. If one object consists of two points or when it's a rod (or something like that) it's pretty easy to show that it all breaks down. (Assuming r to be the distance between respective centers of mass ofc) However, supposedly it holds for spheres. Could you show how would one go about proving such a claim?

[@cynodont7391]

This is the Shell Theorem (Isaac Newton). As the name indicate, the idea is to consider that the spherical object is composed of spherically symmetric shells. The wikipedia page contains the full proof. I remember doing it as an exercise when I was a student 30 years ago. Not easy but feasible for anyone with a reasonable understanding of the integration rules (which I do not have anymore).

[@mskiptr]

@@cynodont7391 Thanks!

[@shalvagang951]

Please try imo 2021 q2

[@riemann8558]

11.2 km/sec

[@smh9859]

what if we don't throw it perpendicular to the tangeant line?

[@beny874]

Oh oh. Maths that I know! One of the few times a filthy casual like me actually understood everything I saw :D

[@moshebr-c9q]

I hope this constant doesn’t steal 300 joules of energy just for fun. 😵‍💫🔋

[@Kuratius]

How fast do I need to go to escape Papa Flammy? Please let us know fast you can run.

[@PapaFlammy69]

4

[@rushwinvaishnav8995]

who is your favourite scientist among physics and maths?

[@jojojorisjhjosef]

Why does it stop falling when shot with that velocity? If u look at newtons gravitational relation, there's always force pulling 2 objects together as long as there's no infinite distance between them or if atleast one of the 2 objects are not equal to 0 mass. huhuhu?!?!?!?!?

[@accountx8328]

The earth will keep exerting a force on the object wherever it is, but keep in mind that the object does not lose any kinetic energy(newtons first law) since there is no air resistance. The object will forever have the same kinetic energy(which the earth could not overcome) so it wouldnt fall down. The gravitational force will also be there, but so will the kinetic energy. Also, the distance will approach infinity so the gravity will become smaller and smaller

[@accountx8328]

Total energy of the ball is E=T+U=0,5mv^2 - GMm/r The only energy that will be lose due to gravity is the potential energy, since r will increase. Kinetic energy will not decrease so it will keep moving forever. The force only drains the objects potential energy

[@jojojorisjhjosef]

@@accountx8328 The first comment made sense but in ur second comment, doesn't the velocity decrease? Also, if the only energy the object loses is potential energy then that wouldn't be a proper energy balance.

[@accountx8328]

@@jojojorisjhjosef my mistake, we have to suppose, like in the video, that E=0 This means that 0,5mv^2=GMm/r as you see, as r increases, the potential energy decreases. This means that the kinetic energy will also decrease(because of the equality), and thus the velocity will also decrease. The velocity will never be 0 or negative(falling back to earth) though, so it will keep moving forward forever, at decreasing speed yes, but it will never stop moving since r will never be infinite

[@Canadianishere]

@@accountx8328 I see, that last comment really explained everything for me, thank you. You should probably remove the first two comments you made because they are completely wrong. 😂

[@JakobMYS]

The moon is like the 57 of planets

[@PapaFlammy69]

:^D

[@theflyingmylle]

2:02 Well pretty simple, burn up in the atmosphere. No math required. :)

[@smh9859]

Isn't the integral of force equal to -U ?

[@fahrenheit2101]

But what if the rocket is losing fuel?

[@angelmpc1725]

Papa flammy is desperate to escape Yo Mama

[@max-yasgur]

Vis viva equation next?

[@dmh20002]

Isn't it true that if the rocket could maintain 1 meter per second (or any other positive velocity) relative to the planet, then eventually the r gets big enough that you escape? Isnt the usual value 11.2 km/sec calculated for the rocket sitting on the ground?

[@kevinb.3541]

I'm not sure if this is what you mean, but yeah if the rocket could maintain a speed of 1 ms-1, meaning it has some sort of thruster system which keeps the net force = 0, then it would just zoom out into infinity at constant speed.

[@dmh20002]

@@kevinb.3541 that's what i mean, that after passing the point where Ve goes below 1 m-s based on r, the rocket could be shut off and it would not fall back.

[@ΕχιΜιμζ]

physics moment 😤😳😳

[@blackflash9935]

Legendary thumbnail

[@PapaFlammy69]

:D

[@vitocipponeri6773]

if you do calculations with this what would you take the value of r to be since it changes

[@adrianoseresi3525]

You forgot a minus sign! Right?

[@nikos4677]

who is joe?

[@JeffKwak221]

what did he say at the very beginning of the lecture that sound is definitely not recognizable human language

[@vedants.vispute77]

2:15 Moon is the best moon* not planet

[@PapaFlammy69]

I know, it was a joke :p

[@vedants.vispute77]

@@PapaFlammy69 I know u knew, but better than commenting a compliment :°

[@TheScienceGuy10]

@@vedants.vispute77 Joe mamma

[@thisguy3572]

Andrew held me in his basement with kelly •••_ _ _ •••

[@akselai]

it's him, the man, the legend, the boi. we all got a load of him 😳

[@thisguy3572]

@@akselai pls send help

[@akselai]

@@thisguy3572 ok here it comes: π = 3.1415926. that many decimal digits should be able to annihilate any known physicist into its baryonic constituents.

[@thisguy3572]

@@akselai I’m not sure they have the power to approximate it to three and my basement partner has Stockholm syndrome and she possesses power to approximate it to 5,10 or any value she likes I can’t risk Please send help

[@akselai]

@@thisguy3572 ummm

[@MEGISTA_NAS]

"The moon for example the best planet over there" 🤣🤣

[@JanxakaJX]

Hallo Flammable Maths oder Papa :) Ich komme aus Australien! In letzter Zeit hab ich mich für Mathe interessiert und dein Channel auf KZbin gefunden. Mehrmals hab ich deine Videos super gefunden und ich wollte sagen, wie viel ich dich schätze. Mein Deutsch ist nicht so gut, da ich nur seit drei Jahre lerne aber ich dachte, dass meine Nachricht besser wäre, auf Deutsch zu sagen

[@PapaFlammy69]

[@pravinrao3669]

What do you think about the statement "physics is just a model" How much stuff is just made up in physics so we can get easier explanations and which may or may not actually exist. Example how we can talk about simple harmonic motion using a phase space with a circle but it doesn't mean phase space physically exists. Another example if in economics we talk about market forces then it doesn't mean such a force physically exists. I think protons ,neutrons and stuff are real. but is stuff like force or energy real or is it just a way we talk about emergent properties of the system. I watched up and atoms video on it and am curious about what you think. . Indian education really sucks out your passion cause of exams.

[@luggepytt]

What makes you think protons and neutrons are real? The things we call elementary particles are just solutions to the Schrödinger equation for some quantum fields. What about those quantum fields then, and the Schrödinger equation itself? Are those real? - Nah. They are just mathematical abstractions that people have made up, and that happen to be reasonably effective when we want to make predictions about the outcome of certain experiments. And that's all we can ever hope for: mathematical models. Mother Nature will continue to do her thing, forever unreachable for the human intellect. At least that’s what the frogs in my garden pond are telling me. Personally, I try to avoid thinking about such deep things. It only hurts my poor brain.

[@pravinrao3669]

I agree but still protons and neutrons somehow feel more real. Like if I were to say a proton exists at a point then for me I am just describing the properties of that point in space. Also basically they feel real cause there is more than one way to measure them. You can see effect of charge ,of them hitting stuff. of them colliding with electrons. They are not just defined by a statement and that statement being the only way to measure them. While if you look at force the only way to know if it exists is by seeing it's effects on movement of other particles. It's not like if there is 20N some light is released which we could measure independently. Even with there was some kind of substrate which we could not interact with and protons were just holes in it or something. We can still say that this position in space is different from all other positions. So when i think of protons i just think of positions in space. I don't know what's at that position. Maybe there is a hole maybe stuff exists there maybe it's a special positions where i see a effect cause of stuff far away. Even if anyone of these explanation was true i think defining proton as just a position in space which behaves differently from other position would work . That definition would not become false even if any of these possibilities are true. So this makes me "feel" that protons are more real. Actually i think human brain can only process the things which we can sense properly. So we can see position clearly so things which we define using position feel more real than things which we define abstractly like energy. So proton may not be different and it might just be a quirk of human mind. Still though i don't really know physics or quantum mechanics so clarifying that. I only know classical mechanics.

[@luggepytt]

@@pravinrao3669 I kinda like your way of thinking! Btw, the frogs in my garden pond now claim that they can actually taste protons, and that they taste sour. That, if true, would definitely make them feel more real.

[@pravinrao3669]

@@luggepytt Wirh frogs it's chemical reaction one way to measure. another thing is that I think we can measure protons independently. (Well this is kinda vague since we still need laboratory equipment and we are only measuring what we see on screen of the equipment) If we were to leave proton in space we can says yeah that's probably a proton but with force you need other things to measure it and can only see its one single effect which is movement . If force produced light or something which we could measure even if something did not accelerate then i would like force better . For energy it's somewhat better because we can at least measure how much gravity it causes

[@GoatzAreEpic]

420 meters per second

[@zerocks2294]

Wait i don’t understand: joe what???

[@weliveinachaoticworld2633]

Papa who's Joe?

[@ИльяДубровин-ц4п]

Supremum🤫

[@timetraveller2818]

Sup

[@kathanshah8305]

Trivial

[@abhinandhrajeev6335]

In India, we learnt this in 11th grade physics

[@tharagleb]

Why didn't you actually calculate the escape velocity from the equation, very annoying. :(

[@spitsmuis4772]

Why talk about a rocket and show exhaust in the thumbnail? Continuous propulsion is exactly what escape velocity is *not* about. "Parabolic flight" is what happens in a constant gravitational field. Your examples of orbits are ellipses, not parabolae.

[@Nameru26]

Who is Joe?

[@D.J.F]

Meanwhile Indians: Hold our beer guys, we study this in class 11.

[@dasav6724]

gotta stay humble bro

[@D.J.F]

@@dasav6724 yupp

[@Akira-shakira]

That clearly doesn’t apply to Joe mama, everyone knows not even the null geodesics pointing towards future can escape from Joe mama if they get too close

[@ahmedfayad1606]

yo

[@dr.menacestein6418]

Joe what?

[@shoopinc]

Von Braun would be proud

[@fredericchopin6445]

joe what?

[@danielesantospirito5743]

Interesting... I know more about mathematics than physics but sometimes it's fun to just try and compute this kind of things intuitively. I don't know many physics formulas but they often appear to be only shortcuts based on analytical intuitions, which can be derived using some calculus. I tried this computation for myself but ended up with a terrible differential equation...

[@gustavoespinoza7940]

What if shoot the rocket at an angle? Lmao get rekt

[@sisyphus645]

Joseph Joestar, please

[@of8155]

Maybe u r a Applied math major because pure mathematics major hate physical things .

[@theghost3133]

13mins when you could do this in 30 secs

[@tszhanglau5747]

How Fast do you Need to Go to Escape your mom's orbit? Infinite!Your mom's mass is so big the escape velocity is infinite!

[@PapaFlammy69]

:DDD

[@jupiterisaturnus8108]

You said the moon is a f***** PLANET!? I'm disappointed...

[@PapaFlammy69]

That was a joke obviously

[@mukundyadav6913]

Day 6 of me practicing my German "Ich bin ein engineer mann und du bist ein physics boi"