Orjada 1

Introduction
There are many things left unknown about the vast universe of space. One of the
great curiosities is if there is gravity in space. It is wondered how much gravity is in
space, if any, and how much acceleration due to gravity artificial satellites experience.
By using the gravitational constant 6.674 E -11 N(m2/kg2) , the masses of Earth and the
satellite, along with the orbital radius, the force can be found. After this is done, dividing
the force by the mass of the satellite will result in the acceleration due to gravity. By
measuring the acceleration due to gravity, and dividing that by the gravity on Earth

9.81

s 2 , the percentage of gravity on each satellite can be found. Using all of this

data, it can be determined how much gravity is actually present on the satellites.
Afterwards, the data will be graphed to see if it shows a linear pattern. If there is reason
to believe the data is linear, a linear regression test will be done. After the ten satellites
are tested Galaxy 15s and the Moons data will be added and all twelve will be tested to
see if there is a linear relationship among the new data.

Orjada 2

Satellite
ISS
MIR

Average
Mass
Distance
(kg)
from Earth
(km)
419455
370
129700
364
11110

559

77088

437.95

Sputnik

83.6

577

Salyut 2

18500

267.5

Salyut 5

19000

246

Terra

4864

715

Aqua

2934

705

Aura

2967

705

Hubble
Skylab

Acceleration
Force
due to
Percent
(N)
Gravity
of 'g' (%)
(m/s^2)
3678136 8.76884509 89.3868
1139347 8.78447583 89.54613
92180.4
8.29706673 84.57764
1
662548.
3 8.59470079 87.61163
690.045
5 8.25413243 84.13998
167271.
9 9.04172165 92.16842
172910.
9 9.10057395 92.76834
38599.5
6 7.93576422 80.89464
23349.3
9 7.95821016 81.12345
23612.0
1 7.95821016 81.12345

Data
Table 1
Satellite Data

Table 1

shows mass, the average distance from Earth, force, acceleration due to gravity, and
percent of g of the ten different satellites, (listed under the header Satellite). The
percent of g ranges from 81.12345% to 92.76834%.
The force between the Earth and the satellites (which is measured in Newtons) is
calculated with the equation shown:

The variable G is the gravitational constant 6.674 E -11 N(m2/kg2), ms is the mass of the
satellite in kg, mE is the mass of the Earth in kg, and r is the distance between the center
of the Earth and the satellite in meters.
The acceleration due to gravity of the satellite is found with the equation below:

Orjada 3

F
ms

where F is the force in Newtons and ms is the mass of the satellite in kg.
The percent of g is calculated by the equation shown below:
%

* 100
9.81

The percent of g is the acceleration due to gravity divided by the acceleration of gravity
on Earth, multiplied by 100.

Figure 1. ISS Calculations

Figure one above shows a sample calculation from the ISS on how the force,
acceleration due to gravity, and percent of g was calculated. The force of gravity

m
2
between the Earth and ISS is 369516.17 N, acceleration due to gravity is 8.768845 s ,

and the percent of g is 89.387%.

Orjada 4

Data Analysis

Figure 2. Scatter Plot of Satellite Data

Figure 2 shows a scatter plot of distance vs. acceleration. The graph shows that
the data might be linear, with a negative slope; there is a possibility that there may be a
very slight, gradual curve, but this observation is done by the naked eye and looks more
linear than parabolic. Because of this a linear regression test should be conducted.
To find out how well a linear line would fit to the data, the correlation coefficient
can be calculated with the given equation below:

x dis tan ce x acceleration

S
S
x

The correlation coefficient is represented by r, n represents the number of values there

n 1

are, xdistance represents each of the distance values, and s x is the standard deviation of
the x values. The variable yaccel is each of the values of acceleration and sy is the

Orjada 5

standard deviation of the y values. If the correlation coefficient is close to positive one,
there is a strong positive linear relationship for the data. If r is close to negative one,
there is a strong negative linear relationship. When r is close to zero, there is a weak
linear relationship.

Figure 3. Correlation Coefficient

Figure 3 shows the correlation coefficient. This value is very close to negative
one, indicating a strong negative linear relationship as mentioned in commenting on the
scatter plot.
The coefficient of determination is the fraction of variation in the values of y that
is explained by the least squares regression of y on x. The equation is shown below:
SSM SSE

SSM

r2

The coefficient of determination is r2. SSM is the sum of the residual squares about the
mean

and SSE is the sum of the residual squares for the error sum of squares.

Figure 4. Coefficient of Determination

Figure 4 above shows the coefficient of determination. The value is 0.998977 and
that value means that nearly 100% of the variation in the y direction is accounted for by
the linear relationship.
The linear squares regression line (LSRL) of y on x is a line that makes the sum
of the squares of the vertical distances of the data from the line as small as possible. Its

Orjada 6

most often in the form = a+bx, where is the predicted value from the regression line
and b is the slope.

Figure 5. LSRL
Figure 5 shows the y-intercept and slope of the LSRL and results in an LSRL of
= 25.552 -0.000002x.
There is reason to conduct a linear regression test because of the correlation
coefficient of almost negative one and a coefficient of determination that shows that
almost all of the variation in y direction is accounted for with a linear line. This fulfills one
of the assumptions of a linear regression test. The assumptions are that the repeated
responses of y are independent of each other and both beta and alpha are unknown
parameters are also met. There must also be a normal distribution and equal standard
deviations where the standard deviation of y is the same for all values of x.

Orjada 7

Figure 6. Residual Plot and Residual Squares

Figure 6 shows the residual plot of the data points and the residual squares. The
sum of the squares is 0.00207106 (approximately 0.002) and confirms that there is not
too much variation from the LSRL. The residual plot of the data shows a trend similar to
a parabolic pattern, indicating that there may be another regression line better suited to
the data points. However, the linear regression test will still be carried out. The results
should be taken with caution, as it has been indicated that a linear regression is not the
best for this data, especially when using the line for extrapolation.

Figure 7. Standard Deviations of X and Y

Figure 7 shows the results of two-variable statistics calculations. The standard
deviation of x is 190524 and the standard deviation of y is 0.474247. The standard

Orjada 8

deviations are not equal and thus, do not fulfill the assumption requirement that the
standard deviations must be equal. Due to both this and the parabolic trend residual
plot, the results should be taken very cautiously.
The null hypothesis and alternate hypothesis used when testing for a linear
relationship is shown below:
Ho:
Ha:
The null hypothesis tests that the slope of the line will be 0, or a horizontal line, and the
alternate hypothesis tests that the slope will be less than zero.

Figure 8. Results of Linear Regression Test

Figure 8 above shows the results of the linear regression test which resulted in a
t-value of -88.3797 and a corresponding p-value of 1.49E-13. This is a very small pvalue and extremely lower than our alpha level of 0.05.
The researchers reject the null hypothesis because a p-value of 1.49E-13 is
lower than the alpha level of 0.05. There is strong evidence that the slope of the linear
regression line is negatively sloped. There is almost a 0% chance that the researchers
would get the results they did by chance alone when the null hypothesis is true.

Orjada 9

However, it should be taken into consideration once more that not all of the assumptions
were met and these results should be taken with caution.

Figure 9. Confidence Interval

Figure 9 displays the 95% confidence interval between -0.000003 to -0.000002.
The researchers are 95% confident that the true slope lies between these two values.
This interval means that if the best fit regression for the data is linear the slope would lie
between these values. This should not be true of course as it was shown that the slope
was approximately -1 if the regression should be linear.
Table 2
Moon and Galaxy 15 Data
Object

Moon
Galaxy 15

Mass
(kg)

Average
Distance
from Earth
(km)

Force (N)

Acceleratio
n due to
Gravity
(m/s^2)

7.38E2
2

384400

1.917327164

0.0026094

2033

35771.5

456.1292

0.2243626

Percent
of 'g' (%)
0.0266
2.28708
1

Table 2

shows the mass, average distance from Earth, force, acceleration due to gravity, and
percent of g on both the Earths moon and Galaxy 15. This data will be added to the
other ten satellite data to see what effect they would have.

Orjada 10

Figure 10. Scatter Plot of Satellite Data with the Moon and Galaxy 15
Figure 10 shows the scatter plot of the satellites with the Moon and Galaxy 15s
data added. The Moon and Galaxy 15 are clearly outliers, incredibly far from all the
other satellite data. The graph does not follow a linear relationship as the distance
increases and there is no reason for the conduction of a linear regression test.

Figure 11. Power Regression and Residual Plot

Figure 11 shows the power regression line fitted to the data and the
corresponding residual plot. The equation for the regression line is y = 3.98466x -2.
Compared to the residual plot of the linear regression line, the power regression line fits
better, with the residuals very close to zero.

Orjada 11

Figure 12. Power Regression Coefficient of Determination and Correlation Coefficient

Figure 12 shows that the correlation coefficient of the power regression line to be
-1. This indicates that the data shows a perfect power relationship. The coefficient of
determination 1 shows that about 100% of the variation in the y direction is accounted
for with the power regression line. The power regression line is a perfect fit for the data.

Conclusion
To answer the question if there is gravity in space and how much, the researcher
found the acceleration experienced by certain satellites and other objects in space.
There seemed to be a linear relationship between the acceleration and distance of the
ten satellites and a linear regression test was applied. The linear regression line fit well
with the data, with a correlation coefficient close to negative one with nearly 100% of the
variation accounted for. However, two of the assumptions were not met; the standard
deviations were not the same for the x and y values and the residual plot showed a
somewhat parabolic pattern, suggesting that there may be a regression line that would
be a better fit. Because of this, be wary of the results when using the linear regression
line when extrapolating. The null hypothesis that the slope would be zero was rejected
with a p-value of almost zero. There is strong evidence that the slope is negative. The
researchers are 95% confident that the true slope lies between -0.000003 to -0.000002.
To see if the linear relationship still held when the distance was increased
dramatically, the acceleration of the Moon and Galaxy 15 were added to the ten
satellites data. They were clear outliers as shown by the scatter plot. The two space
objects did not seem to follow a linear pattern with the rest of the data. When the data

Orjada 12

was fitted to a power regression line, the line was a better fit than the linear. It seems
that as distance from the Earth increases, the acceleration of gravity in space appears
to follow a power relationship.
There is gravity in space, however, as distance increases between an object with
gravity, like Earth, and another object; the acceleration due to gravity decreases
following a power regression. The fact of the matter is that there is approximately 90%
of Earths gravity found on the space station. When people are seen floating in space,
this is because they are in a constant free fall, as it would be inside a vacuum, an
objects mass does not matter (even though it is made up of matter). If two objects were
to be dropped on the space station, they would fall at the same rate. The space station
and the satellites are in a constant free fall around the earth, which causes the people
on the space station to feel like they are in micro, or zero, gravity.
The satellites are able to feel this constant free fall because of the speed at
which they accelerate. While Earths gravity pulls the satellite downward, they
accelerate at such a large speed that it matches the curvature of the Earth. Due to this,
the satellite continually falls towards the Earths surface without every actually reaching
the surface. This gives the satellite the constant free fall and microgravity effect.
As the radius of the satellite from earth increases, the acceleration due to gravity
decreases. The closer the object is to the Earths surface, the faster it has to move to
match the curvature of the Earths surface. So when distance is increased between the
Earth and a satellite, that satellite will move substantially slower in acceleration because
it does not have to go as fast to match the curvature of the surface.

Orjada 13

Works Cited
"Aura (satellite)." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 14 April 2014. Web. 14 April 2014.
"Aqua Project Science." Aqua Project Science. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 April 2014.
Dunbar, Brian. NASA. NASA, n.d. Web. 13 Apr 2014.
"Galaxy 15." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 15 April 2014. Web. 15 April 2014.
"Terra (satellite)." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 14 April. 2014. Web.
April 2014.

14

"Salyut 5." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 14 April 2014. Web. 14 April 2014.
"Salyut 2." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 14 April 2014. Web. 14 April 2014.
"Sputnik 1." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 14 April 2014. Web. 15 April 2014.
"Skylab." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 13 April 2014. Web. 14 April 2014.
"HubbleSite - Out of the Ordinary...out of This World." HubbleSite - Out of the
Ordinary...out of This World. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 April 2014.
"Hubble Space Telescope." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 13 April 2014. Web.
April 2014.

13

"Mir." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 13 April 2014. Web. 13 April 2014.

"Moon." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 15 April 2014. Web. 15 April 2014.
"International Space Station." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 13 April 2014. Web. 13
April 2014.

Orjada 14

"Satellite." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 13 April 2014. Web. 13 April 2014.