Regression of Distance vs.

Acceleration Due to Gravity

Macomb Mathematics Science Technology Center

IDS 3 11C

Mrs. Cybulski

March 20, 2013

 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 2

People know that humans can walk around on earth because of gravity. Gravity

is what holds everything down. But what about in space? Astronauts float around in

outer space and there is no force that holds them down. NASA's satellites float around

in space too. So, is there gravity in space? If so, how much? How much gravity do

artificial satellites experience? The researchers have already done the hard work to find

out, so let us go through it and discover the answer!

Table 1
Satellites' Information
Satellite Mass Average Distance Force of Gravity Acceleration Percent of
(kg) from Earth (km) (N) (m/s2) 'g'

ISS 419455 413 3633834.2820 8.6632 88.4003

MIR 129700 364 1140029.7810 8.7897 89.6912

Hubble 11110 559 92235.6920 8.3020 84.7147

Skylab 77088 437.95 662945.6249 8.5999 87.7536

Sputnik 83.6 577 690.4593 8.2591 84.2764

Salyut 2 18500 267.5 167372.1634 9.0471 92.3178

Salyut 5 19000 246 173014.5997 9.1060 92.9187

Terra 5190 715 41211.3159 7.9405 81.0257

Aqua 2970 686 23777.5791 8.0059 81.6930

Aura 3117 699.5 24859.2470 7.9754 81.3814

Moon 7.35 384400 1.9191E20 0.0026 0.02664

Galaxy 15 2033 35771.5 456.4027 0.2245 2.29079

Table 1 shows the information of the satellites such as their masses and

distances from earth. The table also shows the calculated force of gravity between the

earth and the satellites, the acceleration due to gravity for each of the satellites, and the

percent of gravity.
 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 3

The researchers first created a table (see Table 1) and then filled it in with

necessary information such as the mass of the satellites. The researchers then found

the average distance between the satellites and earth through internet research. Some

of the distances could not be found and were calculated with different kinds of

distances.

The satellites in orbit have two distances that the researchers used: the perigee

and the apogee. The perigee, or the perihelion, is the closest distance the satellite is to

the earth. The apogee, or the aphelion, is the farthest distance the satellite is away from

the earth. These distances are appropriate to use since the orbits of the satellites are

elliptical, meaning they orbit the earth unevenly and sometimes they are closer while

other times they are farther. Figure 1 shows an example of how to calculate the average

distance between the satellite ISS and earth using the perihelion and the aphelion.

Figure 1. Sample Calculation for the Average Distance between the ISS and Earth

The next step was to calculate the force of earths gravity on the satellites. To do

so the researchers needed to use the universal gravitational constant, G, which is

shown in Figure 2.
 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 4

Figure 2. The Universal Gravitational Constant

The universal gravitational constant is used to find the force of gravity between

masses and the acceleration of gravity of an object, if applicable, or planet. Henry

Cavendish calculated the universal gravitational constant, and it is used in the formula

shown in Figure 3 to find the force of gravity between two masses.

Figure 3. Equation for Finding the Force of Gravity between Two Masses

In the equation shown in Figure 3, F(g) stands for the force of gravity between

two masses. The distance between the two objects, r, the masses of the two objects,

m1 and m2, and the universal gravitational constant, G, are used in the equation to find

F(g). This formula was used to find the force of gravity between the satellites and the

earth. In the equation in Figure 3, the universal gravitational constant is multiplied by

the first mass, the mass of the earth, and the second mass, the mass of the satellite.

That part is then divided by the radius, which is squared, and in this case, the radius

would be the average distance between the satellites and earth. Figure 4 shows a

sample calculation of the force of gravity between the moon and the earth.
 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 5

Figure 4. Sample Calculation of the Force of Gravity between the Moon and Earth

The next step was to calculate the satellites accelerations due to gravity. The

researchers knew that force was the product of mass and acceleration. The researchers

had a force and a mass, so it would be simple to calculate acceleration using the force

formula. The force formula was rearranged to solve for acceleration, as seen in figure 5.

Figure 5. The Formula Used to Calculate Acceleration due to Gravity

The next step was to plug in the numbers and solve for acceleration. Figure 6 shows a

sample calculation of the acceleration due to gravity of the moon.

Figure 6. Sample Calculation of the Acceleration Due to Gravity for the Moon
 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 6

The final calculation the researchers did was the percent of acceleration due to

gravity on earth, or as seen in Table 1, percent of 'g'. To calculate this percentage, the

researchers just had to divide the acceleration due to gravity that was calculated by the

amount of gravity on earth. That quotient was then multiplied by 100 to turn it into a

percent. Figure 7 shows a sample calculation of the acceleration of the moon due to

gravity on earth.

Figure 7. Sample Calculation of the Percent of the Moons Acceleration Due to Gravity
on Earth

The researchers then checked with the NASA website and their instructor to

make sure their calculations were correct. Once that was confirmed, the researchers

continued. Their next step was to create a scatter plot of the satellites to see if there

was a linear relationship between distance and the satellites accelerations due to

gravity. Figure 8 shows the scatter plot.

 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 7

Figure 8. Distance vs. Acceleration Scatter Plot

The data shown in Figure 8 shows the satellites distances from earth and their

corresponding accelerations of gravity. By looking at the graph, the researchers could

tell that the data was fairly linear. As the distance increased, the acceleration

decreased. After the researchers evaluated the scatter plot of the data, the assumptions

for a linear regression test were evaluated. The researchers decided to use the TI-

nspire to calculate the correlation coefficient using the equation in Figure 9.

Figure 9. Correlation Coefficient Equation

The r-value was calculated to be -0.9996 meaning there is a strong negative

linear relationship between the distances and accelerations of the satellites. The

correlation coefficient was calculated by using the sums derived from the averages and

standard deviations of x and y and the quotient of one and the quantity of the number

of data points. The correlation coefficient was then squared to find a value of 0.9992.

This value shows how much of the variance in either variable is explained by the other
 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 8

variable. The correlation coefficient squared tells the readers that 99.92% of the points

are explained by each other. In other words, almost 100% of the points are connected to

each other.

Since the data appeared to be linear, the researchers decided to run a linear

regression test. The researchers created two hypotheses as seen in Figure 9. The null

hypothesis is beta equals zero because that would mean the slope is zero and there is

no correlation between x and y. In the scatter plot, the researchers believed the slope to

be negative, therefore they created an alternative hypothesis that beta is less than zero.

Figure 10. Hypotheses for the Linear Regression Test

Before the test could be conducted, though, the assumptions must be met. The

assumptions for a linear regression test were evaluated. The first assumption tested

was whether for all or any fixed value of x, the value for y varies in accordance to a

normal distribution. As shown in the histogram in Figure 11, the residuals varied

according to a normal distribution so a linear model is appropriate. Another assumption

was that the repeated responses of y are independent of each other. There were no

repeated responses of y, so this assumption is also accepted. The third assumption is

that the mean response has a straight-line relationship with x. This assumption was

met because the scatter plot shows that the relationship between the mean of y and
 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 9

the "x" value was linear. The fourth assumption is that alpha and beta are unknown

parameters. The researchers did not know the values for either parameter, therefore

validating that assumption. The final assumption is that the standard deviation of y, or

sigma, is the same for all values of x. This assumption was validated by conducting a

two-variable t test for each of the points.

Figure 11. Histogram for the First Ten Satellites

After checking the assumptions, the researchers used a t statistic, shown in

Figure 12, to run the test. In the equation, b is the slope from the least squares

regression line and SEb is the standard error of the least squares slope. The standard

error of the least squares slope can be rewritten as the standard error over the sum of

the x values subtracted from x bar quantity squared.

Figure 12. t Statistic Equation

To perform the test the researchers needed to find the standard error about the

least squares regression line, which can be calculated by using the equation in figure
 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 10

13. The researchers used their TI-nspires to calculate the standard error and it came out

to be 0.0130.

Figure 13. Equation for the Standard Error About the Least Squares Regression Line

The researchers used this value in their t test, as seen in Figure 12 and calculated a t

statistic of -100.4526 and a p-value of 5.3*10 -14. The researchers rejected the null

hypothesis because the p-value was much lower than the accepted alpha level of 0.05.

There is significant evidence that the slope is negative. There is almost no chance of

getting the same results the researchers did if the null hypothesis was true.

The researchers found an a value of 9.6979, which would be their y intercept,

and a b value of -0.0025, which would be the slope. Using this information, the

researchers discovered the best fitting line for their graph. Figure 14 shows the graph

with its regression line.

 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 11

Figure 14. Scatter Plot of First Ten Satellites with Regression Line

As the researchers believed in the beginning, when they created the scatter plot, the

data was fairly linear. They believed that the line would be a strong negative line and the

data proved them to be correct. They also created a residual plot to make sure that the

least squares regression line fits the data well. The graph is seen in Figure 15 and it

proves the researchers' claims even more. There is an even number of points both

above and below the zero line. To further prove their claims, the researchers decided to

run a 95% confidence interval for the regression slope.

Figure 15. Residual Plot for the First Ten Satellites

The researchers used the formula in Figure 16 to calculate the confidence

interval. They used the b value that they already found, which was -0.0025. To find t*,

the researchers found the degrees of freedom (8), which was on less than the number

of points, and looked for the value in Table C under 95%. The standard error of the least

squares slope b was calculated to be 2.46415

Figure 16. Confidence Interval for the Regression Slope

The confidence interval for the regression slope was calculated to be between -0.0025

and -0.0024. This means that the researchers are 95% confident that the true

population slope falls between -0.0025 and -0.0024.

 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 12

Through this research, the researchers have found that there is gravity in space.

Through their scatter plots and graphs, they have understood that as the distance

increases the acceleration due to gravity decreases, but it never was zero. This means

that all the satellites in space have acceleration due to gravity. However small it may be,

it is still there. The percentages due to earth's gravity is high for the satellites, but it is

not 100% due to Earth's gravity further proving that there is gravity in space. Although,

the researchers began to wonder why the data was so uniform. They knew that they

only used satellites that orbited Earth and wondered if that had an effect on their

regression model. They decided to see what effect other objects in space may have on

it.

The researchers proceeded to create a scatter plot with all of the satellites and

the moon and galaxy 15. The scatter plot can be seen in Figure 17. The researchers

saw that the data did not look linear, but it did look negative.

Figure 17. Scatter Plot of All Satellites with the Moon and Galaxy 15

To test the hypotheses of linear relationship, several steps must be taken. The

researchers took the first step and created a scatter plot. It did not look very linear. The

researchers then created a histogram to see if a linear regression test could be

performed. In Figure 18, the histogram shows that the data is not uniform.
 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 13

Figure 18. Histogram for All Satellites and the Moon and Galaxy 15

There was one major outlier in the histogram of residuals. The data was

beginning to prove to the researchers that there was no linear relationship. The

researchers wanted to be absolutely sure of this fact, so the researchers decided to

create a plot of residuals. Figure 19 shows the plot of residuals for all the satellites with

the moon and galaxy 15.

Figure 19. Residual Plot for All Satellites and the Moon and Galaxy 15

The residual plot looked very uneven. There was only one point below the zero

line, while the other 12 were above. There was not a uniform spread of data. This

further proved that there is no linear relationship. The researchers looked at the scatter

plot once more and ran a few regression tests on their TI-nspire. To the researchers, the

best fitting line seemed to be the power regression, which is seen in Figure 20.
 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 14

Figure 20. Regression Line for all 12 Objects in Space with Equation

The power equation fit the data the best. It went through most of the points. What

is unique about this model is that it has two asymptotes: y = zero and x = zero. This

means that the acceleration cannot be zero and the distance cannot be zero either. This

makes sense because anything that is not the earth has to be some distance greater

than 0 km away from earth and also because everything in space accelerates at an

acceleration greater than 0 m/s2.

To answer the original question, the researchers concluded that there is gravity in

space because the percentage of acceleration due to gravity on earth is not 100%,

therefore, there is other gravity in space. Everything has a gravitational force, no matter

how small. Satellites experience roughly 80 to 95% of Earth's gravity out in space.

When these satellites are out in space, they experience constant freefall at the same

rate as the spacecraft. Since there is no air, mass does not matter, so both the object

and the satellite are falling at the same acceleration and it seems like the objects are

floating. The sun's gravity reaches very far out and other stars' gravity holds in things in

space as well. There is always at least a little gravity in everywhere space.

 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 15

Works Cited

"Aqua (satellite)." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 03 May 2013. Web. 19 Mar. 2013.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_(satellite)>.

"Aura (satellite)." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 03 May 2013. Web. 19 Mar. 2013.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aura_(satellite)>.

"Hubble Telescope." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 19 Mar. 2013. Web. 19 Mar.

2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Telescope>.

"International Space Station." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 19 Mar. 2013. Web. 19

Mar. 2013. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station>.

"Mir." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 19 Mar. 2013. Web. 19 Mar. 2013.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir>.

Rose, David. "Apogee and Perigee of the Moon." Moon Apogee and Perigee.

BlueMarmot, Inc., 2013. Web. 15 Mar. 2013.

<http://www.moonconnection.com/apogee_perigee.phtml>.

"Salyut 2." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 18 Mar. 2013. Web. 19 Mar. 2013.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salyut_2>.

"Salyut 5." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 18 Mar. 2013. Web. 19 Mar. 2013.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salyut_5>.

"Skylab." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 19 Mar. 2013. Web. 19 Mar. 2013.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylab>.

"Solar System Exploration: Planets: Earth's Moon: Overview." Solar System

Exploration: Planets: Earth's Moon: Overview. NASA, 13 Dec. 2012. Web. 19

Mar. 2013. <http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Moon>.

 Choudhury-Mubashira-Saraza 16

"Sputnik." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 17 Mar. 2013. Web. 19 Mar. 2013.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sputnik>.

"Terra (satellite)." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 03 Sept. 2013. Web. 19 Mar. 2013.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_(satellite)>.

Thome, Kurtis. "About Terra." NASA: TERRA (EOS AM-1) The EOS Flagship. Ed. Paul

Przyborski. NASA, 19 July 2011. Web. 19 Mar. 2013.

<http://terra.nasa.gov/about/>.