Inverse-square potential ($V(r)=-k/r$)

Here inverse-square potential means the potential energy associated with an attractive inverse-square law for a central force: the potential energy itself varies as inverse distance. For $k>0$ and position $\mathbf{r}$ with $r=|\mathbf{r}|>0$,The gradient makes the distinction explicit: doubling $r$ halves the magnitude of potential energy but quarters the magnitude of force. The neighboring repulsive inverse-square potential instead has potential energy proportional to $r^{-2}$ and an inverse-cube force; the two naming conventions must be distinguished.

For Newton's law of universal gravitation, $k=GMm$, where $G$ is the gravitational constant. Treat the attracting mass $M$ as an isolated fixed point mass, or as a body with spherical symmetry and exterior test particle of constant mass $m\ll M$. The spherical shell theorem gives the same exterior Newtonian gravitational potential energy $U=-GMm/r$ without requiring uniform mass density. Here $r$ is measured from the centre, and the formula applies outside the body; it does not describe its interior. The Newtonian gravitational potential per unit mass is $\Phi =U/m=-GM/r$.^[ref]

The negative sign records binding relative to infinite separation, rather than a negative kinetic energy. Moving from $r_1$ to $r_2>r_1$ increases potential energy byBecause the force is a conservative force, this work depends on the endpoints, including for a curved path. Integrating $dV/dr=k/r^2$ with zero at infinity gives $V=-k/r$; adding a constant leaves the force unchanged but shifts the numerical escape energy threshold by that same constant. This is why the reference at infinity must accompany an escape velocity calculation.

For an exact synthetic comparison, stipulate the standard gravitational parameter $\mu =GM=8{\mathrm{m}}^3/{\mathrm{s}}^2$ and a $1\mathrm{kg}$ test particle. At $r=2\mathrm{m}$, $U=-4\mathrm{J}$ and the inward force has magnitude $2\mathrm{N}$; at $r=4\mathrm{m}$, $U=-2\mathrm{J}$ and the inward force has magnitude $0.5\mathrm{N}$. The increase is $2\mathrm{J}$ of potential energy. These stipulated parameters are an arithmetic example, not observations of a particular body. The escape-energy balance diagram uses the same parameters.

In the isolated model, conservation of energy and angular momentum conservation reduce the exterior test particle's motion toHere $\epsilon$ is specific orbital energy and $h$ is specific angular momentum. The effective potential is ${\Phi }_{\mathrm{eff}}=h^2/(2r^2)-\mu /r$. A zero radial velocity is a radial turning point, and need not mean zero total speed: at the periapsis or apoapsis of a nonradial Kepler orbit, tangential velocity remains. Thus the vertical gap between $\epsilon$ and $-\mu /r$ represents total kinetic energy per unit mass, whereas the gap above ${\Phi }_{\mathrm{eff}}$ represents its radial part.

For $h>0$, the orbital eccentricity obeys $e^2=1+2\epsilon h^2/{\mu }^2$. Negative $\epsilon$ gives an elliptic orbit, including a circular orbit at its minimum allowed energy; zero $\epsilon$ gives a parabolic trajectory; positive $\epsilon$ gives a hyperbolic Kepler orbit. The effective potential tends to zero from below at infinity, so its outer region creates no extra positive escape barrier. This explains why escape velocity depends on energy even though angular momentum changes the path. The $h=0$ case is radial motion, rather than a nondegenerate parabola or hyperbola; inward radial motion can end in collision.

One motivating laboratory demonstration compares two balls initially at the same height. A switch releases one vertically when the other leaves a horizontal track; arranging their paths to meet gives a collision as the readout of equal downward displacement over equal time. Equal initial height and synchronized release control the comparison. This tests the local independence of horizontal motion and free fall, under nearly constant gravitational acceleration; it does not measure an inverse-square law.^[ref]

A complementary astronomical comparison uses the Moon's distance and orbital period to infer inward centripetal acceleration, $a=4{\pi }^{2}r/T^2$, and compares it with surface gravitational acceleration scaled by $(R/r{)}^2$. The approximately sixtyfold distance ratio gives the approximately $1/3600$ prediction. The inference links terrestrial free fall to a lunar orbit. Distance calibration matters; the circular orbit approximation and the Sun's tidal force limit this elementary comparison.^[ref]

Lunar laser ranging gives a more discriminating orbit readout. An observatory directs short laser pulses at a retroreflector array on the Moon, and a detector records returning photons. Round-trip time, statistically combined over several returns, constrains distance; pressure and temperature accompany the readout. The fitted model includes Newtonian gravity, terrestrial and lunar rotation, geophysical effects, and corrections from general relativity. Comparing orbit determination residuals across stations and model choices checks consistency. The inspected study reports $1.8\mathrm{cm}$ weighted root mean square residuals for its 2005–2011 ranges, rather than for a bare isolated inverse-square potential. It tests the equivalence principle using the Earth and Moon's response to the Sun; it is not a direct escape velocity measurement. Uneven coverage near new and full Moon, radiation pressure, and thermal expansion of reflector mounts limit that inference.^[ref]

A retroreflector returns incident light approximately toward its source. Corner-cube arrays make the lunar laser ranging round trip possible.

Three mutually perpendicular mirrors reverse a ray's direction when it encounters all three. With orthonormal normals $a,b,c$, write the reflections as $I-2P_a$, $I-2P_b$, $I-2P_c$. Their orthogonal projection matrices have pairwise products zero and sum to $I$ by the resolution of the identity in an orthonormal basis. The product of the three reflections is therefore $-I$. It reverses every incident direction independently of the order in which the mirrors are met. Real apertures restrict which incoming rays actually reach all three reflecting faces. Such retroreflectors provide the returning-light geometry in lunar laser ranging.