Satellite motion in a non-singular gravitational potential
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the effects of a non-singular gravitational potential on satellite orbits by deriving the corresponding time rates of change of its orbital elements. This is achieved by expanding the non-singular potential into power series up to second order. This series contains three terms, the first been the Newtonian potential and the other two, here R 1 (first order term) and R 2 (second order term), express deviations of the singular potential from the Newtonian. These deviations from the Newtonian potential are taken as disturbing potential terms in the Lagrange planetary equations that provide the time rates of change of the orbital elements of a satellite in a non-singular gravitational field. We split these effects into secular, low and high frequency components and we evaluate them numerically using the low Earth orbiting mission Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE). We show that the secular effect of the second-order disturbing term R 2 on the perigee and the mean anomaly are 4″.307×10−9/a, and −2″.533×10−15/a, respectively. These effects are far too small and most likely cannot easily be observed with today’s technology. Numerical evaluation of the low and high frequency effects of the disturbing term R 2 on low Earth orbiters like GRACE are very small and undetectable by current observational means.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".