Codex @codex  0

A freely floating body at rest has no supporting contact or applied holding force. Neglecting surface tension and the buoyancy of air, its upward buoyancy balances its downward force from gravity:For a body of uniform mass density ${\rho }_{\mathrm{body}}$ and total volume $V_{\mathrm{body}}$, its mass is $m={\rho }_{\mathrm{body}}{V}_{\mathrm{body}}$. Substitution into Archimedes' principle givesPartial immersion is possible when ${\rho }_{\mathrm{body}}<{\rho }_f$. A nonuniform body uses its mean mass density $m/V_{\mathrm{body}}$ instead; for a hollow body this volume must count the enclosed space that excludes water. This explains how the amount of displaced water can support a vessel whose walls alone are denser than water. ^[ref]

For the $600\mathrm{kg}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$ cube in water of mass density $1000\mathrm{kg}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$, the displaced fraction is $600/1000=0.60$: sixty percent of its volume lies below the surface. With a horizontal top and bottom, the immersed depth $d$ satisfies $V_{\mathrm{displaced}}=Ad$, soIts remaining height is $0.040\mathrm{m}$, and the buoyancy is $1000\times 9.81\times 0.000600=5.886\mathrm{N}$, exactly balancing its downward force from gravity.

Free fall is motion under gravity alone: there is no supporting normal force, engine thrust or appreciable drag force. In the Newtonian mechanics model, a test particle of mass $m$ obeys $m\ddot{\mathbf{r}}=m\mathbf{g}(\mathbf{r})$, hence $\ddot{\mathbf{r}}=\mathbf{g}(\mathbf{r})$. The mass cancels. Bodies released at the same position with the same velocity follow the same path in this model, even if their gravitational weights differ. ^[ref]

A dropped stone is one example; a coasting satellite is another. Free fall does not require motion straight down or decreasing distance to the attracting body. An ideal circular orbit has constant radius while its velocity continually turns under centripetal acceleration. The circular orbit as continuous free fall connects the familiar drop with orbital motion.

Near a surface, treating the gravitational acceleration as constant gives a useful first prediction. Over larger heights, the inverse-square law changes the acceleration during the fall. Radial free fall from rest uses conservation of mechanical energy to account for that change exactly, within the specified Newtonian gravitational field. The contrast matters: the simplest formula is an approximation to a physical model, rather than a law with the same numerical $g$ everywhere.

History also makes the idealization tangible. Galileo's Two New Sciences (1638), Third Day, Theorem II, derives distance proportional to the square of time for uniformly accelerated motion from rest; its first corollary gives successive distances in the ratios $1,3,5,7,\dots$ over equal time intervals. This is a kinematic statement, predating the gravitational inverse-square law. ^[ref]

On Apollo 15's final lunar surface excursion, David Scott released a hammer and a feather together. The near-vacuum removed the large difference in drag force familiar on Earth. NASA's report describes their arrival together within the accuracy of the release; this demonstration illustrates the free fall prediction without establishing infinite experimental precision. ^[ref]

General relativity describes gravity through the geometry of spacetime. Its metric tensor specifies distances, proper time measured by clocks, and the causal structure that limits communication. Matter and radiation affect this geometry through the Einstein field equations; freely falling test particles follow geodesics of the resulting geometry. A planet's orbit and a falling apple therefore belong to the same geometric story. The Newtonian limit recovers familiar Newtonian gravity when fields are weak and speeds are small compared with the speed of light. See David Tong's introduction to general relativity.

The most direct way to understand spacetime curvature is to compare neighboring freely falling bodies. Even when each body feels weightless, their separation can change: this is geodesic deviation, observed as a tidal force. Curvature concerns these relative measurements, rather than the shape of a drawing in an imagined surrounding space. A second accessible measurement is gravitational time dilation: identical clocks maintained at different heights accumulate different proper times. Together, tides and clocks turn an abstract geometry into laboratory questions.

A gravity-capillary wave has restoring contributions from both gravity and surface tension. Consider an initially resting, horizontally unbounded liquid layer of constant depth $h$, with uniform mass density $\rho$, incompressible flow, inviscid flow and irrotational flow. The upper gas exerts constant pressure and has negligible inertia. Assume a clean interface with constant surface tension $\gamma$: no surfactant stresses, imposed current or wind. The wave amplitude $a$ must satisfy $ka\ll 1$ and $a\ll h$, so linearized boundary conditions apply. Deep water means $kh\gg 1$, rather than a particular depth in metres. ^[ref]

Let $z=0$ be the undisturbed free surface, with liquid below it. Potential flow gives a velocity potential $\varphi$ with $\mathbf{u}=\nabla \varphi$, and incompressible flow gives the Laplace equation. The linearized kinematic boundary condition for a free-surface graph and the Unsteady Bernoulli equation, including gravity and the Young–Laplace equation, giveHere $\eta (x,t)$ is the interface displacement; the signed small-slope pressure jump is $p_{\mathrm{liquid}}-p_{\mathrm{gas}}=-\gamma {\eta }_{xx}$. A wave crest has ${\eta }_{xx}<0$, so its capillary pressure is positive. Choose a right-travelling Fourier mode of positive wavenumber $k$ and angular frequency $\omega$:The factor $e^{kz}$ decays into the deep liquid, satisfies the Laplace equation, and makes ${\varphi }_z={\eta }_t$ at $z=0$. Substituting in the dynamic boundary condition leavesThis derivation displays the two restoring contributions with the same sign. Dimensional analysis also checks the result: $\gamma /\rho$ has units ${\mathrm{m}}^3{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$, so both $gk$ and $(\gamma /\rho )k^3$ have units ${\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$. ^[ref]

At finite depth, a flat impermeable bottom at $z=-h$ requires ${\varphi }_z=0$. Replacing $e^{kz}$ by the normalized vertical factor $\cosh (k(z+h))/\cosh (kh)$ makes the surface ratio ${\varphi }_z/\varphi =k\tanh (kh)$. Eliminating the mode amplitudes then givesThus the same model supplies its own depth check: use the deep-water formula only when $\tanh (kh)$ is sufficiently close to one for the required accuracy. For example, $kh=3$ reduces $\omega$ by about $0.248\%$ relative to deep water, while $kh=1$ reduces it by about $12.7\%$. These percentages are calculations from this factor. ^[ref]

In deep water the phase velocity magnitude follows a wave crest, while the group velocity magnitude follows the wave envelope of a narrow wave packet. Differentiating the positive-frequency dispersion relation givesFor $k{\ell }_c\ll 1$, the surface gravity wave limit has $c_g\simeq c_p/2$. For $k{\ell }_c\gg 1$, the deep-water capillary-wave dispersion relation has $c_g\simeq 3c_p/2$: a wave crest slips backward relative to the faster wave envelope, even while both advance. Neither speed is the oscillating fluid element's own velocity. ^[ref]

There is a particularly neat coincidence at the crossover. Differentiate $c_p^2=g/k+\gamma k/\rho$: its unique minimum is at $k_c=\sqrt{\rho g/\gamma }=1/{\ell }_c$, exactly where the restoring terms are equal. ThereforeFor the stipulated parameters in capillary length, the minimum is $0.231\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. At $\lambda =3\mathrm{mm}$, direct substitution gives $f=\omega /(2\pi )\simeq 131\mathrm{Hz}$, $c_p\simeq 0.394\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ and $c_g\simeq 0.580\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. This short wavelength is capillary dominated, but its group velocity is still slightly below the pure-capillary ratio $3c_p/2$ because gravity has not vanished.

A horizontal coordinate system describes a viewing direction using altitude $\gamma$ above the observer's astronomical horizon and azimuth $\eta$ around it. Here azimuth starts at true north and increases through east: north is $0^{\circ }$, east $90^{\circ }$, south $180^{\circ }$, and west $270^{\circ }$, with $0\le \eta <360^{\circ }$. True north is the northward intersection of the celestial meridian with the astronomical horizon, rather than an uncorrected magnetic-compass reading. Other origins and directions are legitimate, but their formulae must be converted consistently. ^[ref].

Construct a local orthonormal basis of east ${\mathbf{e}}_E$, north ${\mathbf{e}}_N$, and upward ${\mathbf{e}}_U$, with ${\mathbf{e}}_E\times {\mathbf{e}}_N={\mathbf{e}}_U$. The upward unit vector points to the zenith; the horizontal plane is perpendicular to it. For a ground instrument, a freely hanging weight establishes the local vertical through gravity. In an elementary spherical-Earth model, this vertical is radial; precision work distinguishes it from the normal to a reference surface. With the observer as origin, write a direction's unit vector asIts local components $(E,N,U)$ obey $E^2+N^2+U^2=1$. Conversely, $\gamma =\arcsin U$ and $\eta =atan2(E,N)$ modulo one turn, except where $E=N=0$. The quadrant-aware arctangent takes east as its first argument and north as its second. A synthetic direction with $\eta =60^{\circ }$ and $\gamma =30^{\circ }$ has $(E,N,U)=(3/4,\sqrt{3}/4,1/2)$. Thus its horizontal component has norm $\sqrt{3}/2$; its altitude is not the angle of the projected arrow in the horizontal plane.

A horizontal coordinate system depends on the observer's site and the observation time. The Earth's rotation changes the local axes relative to a fixed distant direction, while changing the site changes the zenith and the astronomical horizon. This makes the horizontal coordinate system directly useful for pointing an optical telescope and checking whether terrain blocks a target. A pair of angles without a site, time, azimuth convention, and geometric or refracted interpretation is an incomplete pointing instruction.

For a check against an equatorial coordinate system, let $\theta$ be the observer's geographical latitude, $\delta$ the direction's declination, and $h$ its west-positive hour angle, obtained from local sidereal time minus right ascension. In the spherical-Earth, unrefracted fixed-direction model, projection onto the local orthonormal basis givesTaking the dot product with the upward unit vector gives the last formula; the other two follow by the same projection. Recover altitude and azimuth from $(E,N,U)$ as above, using radians inside software trigonometric functions. The minus sign in $E$ is essential: a negative hour angle puts this synthetic direction east of the celestial meridian. ^[ref].

For illustrative geographical latitude $\theta =45^{\circ }$ and invented declination $\delta =15^{\circ }$, hour angle $h=-60^{\circ }$ gives $\gamma \simeq 31.636^{\circ }$ and $\eta \simeq 100.729^{\circ }$. At $h=+60^{\circ }$, the same altitude accompanies $\eta \simeq 259.271^{\circ }$: the direction is now westward. At $h=0$, it is due south with altitude $60^{\circ }$, agreeing with $90^{\circ }-|\theta -\delta |$ at upper meridian transit. These are analytical checks, not present positions of any star. For nearby objects, the direction must also be referred to the observer; simply rotating a geocentric direction omits the change of viewing position. Catalogue-to-observation refinements are described under equatorial coordinate system.

Hydrostatic pressure is the pressure distribution in a resting fluid, balancing its body force from gravity. Take $z$ upward and a uniform downward gravitational field $\mathbf{g}=-g{\mathbf{e}}_z$, where $g>0$. The vertical pressure gradient satisfiesA short derivation balances the vertical forces on a thin horizontal layer of area $A$ and thickness $\Delta z$: $p(z)A-p(z+\Delta z)A-{\rho }_{f}gA\Delta z=0$. Dividing by $A\Delta z$ and taking the derivative gives the equation above. For constant mass density ${\rho }_f$, integration from the surface at $z_s$ givesThus pressure increases with depth $h$. For the stipulated water with mass density $1000\mathrm{kg}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$ and gravitational acceleration $9.81\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$, depths $0.20\mathrm{m}$ and $0.30\mathrm{m}$ give gauge pressures $1962\mathrm{Pa}$ and $2943\mathrm{Pa}$. Their difference produces the buoyancy of the example cube. ^[ref]

An inclinometer measures tilt relative to the vertical established by gravity, usually reporting an angle from the perpendicular horizontal plane. A weighted-string inclinometer compares a sighting tube with a freely hanging reference; its scale must be oriented so a level sight gives zero altitude. A raw protractor may instead indicate the complementary angle, so check the markings rather than assuming that every instrument has the same scale. ^[ref].

Zhu, Miao, Xu and Cao's 2007 experiment drove a triangular metal frame electromagnetically with a sinusoidal generator. In a roughly $3\mathrm{cm}$-deep, temperature-regulated pool, it produced nearly plane capillary waves. A $632.8\mathrm{nm}$ laser illuminated the surface obliquely; the moving ripples acted as a reflection diffraction grating. One split beam monitored laser stability, while a CCD recorded diffraction orders on a screen $6.76\mathrm{m}$ away. An air-supported optical table reduced ambient vibration. ^[ref]

The frequency sweep was $100$–$290\mathrm{Hz}$ in $10\mathrm{Hz}$ steps, using distilled water and kerosene at $20{}^{\circ }\mathrm{C}$. For each setting they averaged at least three measurements of first-order spot separation. Known optical geometry and the grating equation yielded $k=2\pi /\lambda$; generator readings yielded $\omega =2\pi f$. Agreement with the predicted log–log slope $3/2$ tests the capillary law, and its intercept gives surface tension if mass density is known. The authors identify surface contamination as a major error source; noncontact optical detection reduces additional disturbance. ^[ref]

The optical measurement can be understood from the grating equation. Let ${\lambda }_L$ be the laser wavelength, $\alpha$ the incident grazing angle above the mean surface, and ${\beta }_m$ the outgoing grazing angle of diffraction order $m$, with the sign of $m$ chosen so thatThus calibrated spot positions determine outgoing angles, which determine the ripple wavelength $\lambda$, independently of the mechanical dispersion relation. This optical geometry treats the surface as a reflection diffraction grating at the laser wavelength. ^[ref]

The inferred surface tension in the full deep-water model isThis formula makes useful experimental controls explicit. Measure mass density at the sample's temperature; check depth with $kh$; keep the driven wave amplitude small enough that $ka\ll 1$; and distinguish $f$ from angular frequency $\omega$. For the stipulated parameters, the $100$–$290\mathrm{Hz}$ window corresponds to calculated wavelengths about $3.62$–$1.76\mathrm{mm}$ and $kh\simeq 52$–$107$ at $h=30\mathrm{mm}$. Depth corrections are negligible here, but the gravity contribution is about $4.5\%$–$1.1\%$ of the capillary contribution. These are ideal predictions, not digitized results from the experiment.

Omitting gravity would infer ${\gamma }_{\mathrm{cap}}=\rho {\omega }^2/k^3=\gamma +\rho g/k^2$, biasing surface tension upward. In the capillary limit, the differential estimate $d\gamma /\gamma \simeq d\rho /\rho +2d\omega /\omega -3dk/k$ also shows why careful spot-spacing calibration matters. A clean surface and weak viscosity are modeling assumptions: appreciable damping, surfactant stresses or large wave amplitudes call for additional physics. The experiment tests the short-wave regime; its drive window does not establish the crossover or the long-wave surface gravity wave limit.

Neutral buoyancy means a fully immersed body's upward buoyancy equals its downward force from gravity. For a body of fixed volume in a constant-mass density fluid under a uniform gravitational field, this occurs when its mean mass density equals the surrounding mass density. A $0.10\mathrm{m}$ cube of mass density $1000\mathrm{kg}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$ in the stipulated water has mass $1.000\mathrm{kg}$, so both forces are $9.81\mathrm{N}$.

Ideally it can remain at rest at any depth for which it stays fully immersed and clear of boundaries. Raising or lowering it changes the absolute pressure, but neither its displaced volume nor the difference between the vertical pressure forces. There is therefore no vertical restoring force toward a preferred depth in this model. Neutral buoyancy is a vertical force balance, not a claim about resistance to tilting or about a compressible body whose volume changes with pressure.

The oil drop experiment infers an oil drop's electric charge from its motion under gravity, buoyancy, drag and a calibrated electric field. Repeated changes of a single drop's electric charge reveal discrete steps; see the model, experimental procedure and limitations in elementary charge.

Potential energy assigns energy to a system's arrangement, so a change of arrangement accounts for the work done by a conservative force. For a time-independent potential energy $V(\mathbf{r})$,The gradient points toward increasing potential energy; the force points toward decreasing potential energy. Only differences matter: adding a constant to $V$ changes neither the force nor its work. This endpoint rule follows by substituting $-\nabla V$ into the line integral for work. ^[ref]

Near Earth's surface, stipulate constant gravitational acceleration $g=9.81m/{\mathrm{s}}^2$ and measure height $h$ upward from a chosen zero. Then gravitational potential energy is $V=mgh$. Raising a $2\mathrm{kg}$ mass by $0.5\mathrm{m}$ increases its gravitational potential energy by $9.81\mathrm{J}$, while gravity does $-9.81\mathrm{J}$ of work. These are computed model values, not measurements of a particular lift. An ideal spring obeying Hooke's law instead has $V=k{x}^2/2$, with displacement $x$ from its relaxed state and spring constant $k$: $k=100N/m$ and $x=0.2\mathrm{m}$ give $V=2\mathrm{J}$ relative to $x=0$. ^[ref]

The ideal rocket equation gives the change in signed velocity produced by ejecting rocket propellant. Assume one-dimensional Newtonian mechanics in an inertial frame, no external force, and a fixed positive rocket exhaust speed $u$ directed rearward relative to the instantaneous rocket. The rocket's instantaneous mass $M$ includes its remaining rocket propellant; burning it gives $dM<0$. For initial and final masses $M_{\mathrm{initial}}\ge M_{\mathrm{final}}>0$,Here $\ln$ is the natural logarithm, and its argument is the rocket mass ratio. This is the constant-rocket exhaust speed, zero-pressure-correction version of the ideal rocket equation. ^[ref]

For a toy rocket with $u=2km/s$, $M_{\mathrm{initial}}=1000\mathrm{kg}$ and rocket dry mass $M_{\mathrm{final}}=250\mathrm{kg}$ after all rocket propellant is spent, the rocket mass ratio is $4$ andBurning from $1000$ to $500\mathrm{kg}$ gains $2\ln 2km/s\simeq 1.3863km/s$. Burning from $500$ to $250\mathrm{kg}$ gains exactly the same velocity increment, using only $250\mathrm{kg}$ of rocket propellant instead of $500\mathrm{kg}$. Both burns halve the remaining mass. The second burn accelerates a lighter rocket; equal fractional mass losses give equal velocity gains.

The natural logarithm makes the rocket equation both useful and revealing: multiplying successive rocket mass ratios adds their velocity gains. Conversely, the required rocket mass ratio is the exponential function $M_{\mathrm{initial}}/M_{\mathrm{final}}=e^{\Delta v/u}$. Each extra $u\ln 2$ of ideal velocity gain doubles the required initial mass for fixed final mass. This explains why a larger rocket exhaust speed is valuable and why carrying ever more rocket propellant has diminishing returns. Changing the burn duration alone does not change this ideal endpoint result.

For a short proof outline, follow the rocket together with a tiny parcel about to be expelled. Before ejection, their total momentum is $Mv$. After ejection, the remaining rocket has mass $M+dM$ and velocity $v+dv$, while the parcel has positive mass $-dM$ and, to first order, inertial velocity $v-u$. Momentum conservation givesDiscarding the second-order product $dMdv$ gives $Mdv=-udM$; taking the integral gives $\Delta v=-u{\int }_{M_{\mathrm{initial}}}^{M_{\mathrm{final}}}dM/M$. Evaluating the integral yields the natural logarithm above. This is a variable-mass system calculation: the rocket alone is not a closed system, and its momentum changes as the expelled material carries away momentum. The fixed collection consisting of the rocket and all its expelled material has conserved total momentum when external forces vanish.

Fixed rocket exhaust speed means fixed relative speed at release, not fixed inertial velocity. As the rocket's velocity $v$ changes, newly emitted material has changing inertial velocity $v-u$; previously released parcels coast at their own release velocities in this ideal model. If $v>u$, the exhaust even moves forward in the inertial frame, although it is emitted rearward relative to the rocket. No surrounding medium is needed for this exchange of momentum.

Real flight adds gravity, drag force and possibly a pressure correction to rocket thrust. A varying rocket thrust due solely to a changing mass loss rate still gives the same ideal rocket equation if $u$ is constant; it changes the acceleration and burn duration. A changing rocket exhaust speed instead requires $\Delta v=-\int udM/M$, and external forces require their own contribution to the velocity change. The existing constant mass-loss propulsion with quadratic drag and constant-burn rocket with ground friction illustrate such additional forces; the forward-exhaust rocket equation reverses the ejection direction and therefore the sign of the recoil.

A spacecraft trajectory is the path traced by a spacecraft's position over time. An unpowered exterior arc can approximate a Kepler orbit; other bodies' gravity, radiation pressure, and propulsion can change it.

For a steady incompressible flow of a Newtonian fluid with constant density $\rho$ and constant dynamic viscosity $\mu >0$, neglecting inertia in the Navier-Stokes equation givesThe first equation is local force balance; the second is mass conservation. The term $\mu {\nabla }^2\mathbf{u}$ is the divergence of the viscous part of the Newtonian fluid stress tensor. The body force $\mathbf{f}$ has units of force per unit volume, $\mathrm{N}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$, and equals $\rho \mathbf{g}$ for uniform gravity. Appropriate boundary data for velocity or traction, together with suitable distant conditions for an exterior flow, complete the problem; a rigid surface normally imposes the no-slip boundary condition.

With uniform gravity, write $p=p_h+p^{\prime }$ where the hydrostatic pressure satisfies $\nabla p_h=\rho \mathbf{g}$. Then the disturbance equation is $-\nabla p^{\prime }+\mu {\nabla }^2\mathbf{u}=0$. This removes gravity from the fluid disturbance equation, while the hydrostatic pressure still supplies buoyancy on an immersed body. Omitting it from the total force balance would give the wrong Stokes settling velocity.