Gravitational Potential
The US Department of Defense deployed 24 GPS satellites in 20,200 km MEO orbits (1978–1994). At that altitude, gravitational potential $V = -GM/r$ is 7% less negative than at Earth's surface. This potential difference causes GPS atomic clocks to run 45 μs/day fast due to general relativistic effects — and without the 45 μs/day correction applied to every GPS satellite, navigation would drift by 10 km per day.
Practise this lesson
Four printable worksheets that build from the foundations up to exam-style questions — start at whatever level suits you.
Does gravitational potential increase or decrease as you move closer to a mass? Sketch how you think $V$ varies with distance $r$.
Write down your prediction before working through the lesson — you will revisit it at the end.
Warm-up — gravitational potential energy for a mass $m$ at distance $r$ from a central mass $M$ is given by $U = -GMm/r$. Gravitational potential $V$ is therefore…
Know — Define Gravitational Potential
- Define gravitational potential as $V = -GM/r$
- Relate potential to GPE per unit mass ($V = U/m$)
- State units (J/kg) and scalar nature
Understand — Potential Gradient
- Use $g = -dV/dr$ to connect field and potential
- Interpret graphs of $V$ vs $r$ and $g$ vs $r$
- Estimate $g$ from potential differences
Can Do — Equipotential Surfaces
- Describe equipotential surfaces around spherical masses
- Explain why work done along an equipotential is zero
- Relate spacing of equipotentials to field strength
Gravitational potential $V$ has the same units as gravitational potential energy $U$.
An equipotential surface has constant gravitational field strength $g$ at every point on it.
Gravitational potential $V$ is a positive quantity that increases as you approach a mass.
Core Content
GPE per unit mass — a scalar field quantity
A GPS satellite orbits at 20,200 km altitude, where Earth's gravitational potential is $V = -GM/r = -1.57 \times 10^7$ J/kg. At Earth's surface, $V = -6.26 \times 10^7$ J/kg. The difference, $\Delta V = 4.69 \times 10^7$ J/kg, is the energy per kilogram required to lift any object (regardless of its mass) from the surface to that orbit. This is what makes gravitational potential useful: it's a property of the location, not of what sits there.
Gravitational potential $V = -GM/r$ as a function of distance $r$ from the central mass.
Equipotential surfaces (spheres) and gravitational field lines (radial arrows) around a spherical mass.
$V = \dfrac{U}{m} = -\dfrac{GM}{r}$ — J/kg (joules per kilogram), scalar
$G = 6.67 \times 10^{-11} \text{ N m}^2\text{/kg}^2$ · $r = R_{\text{planet}} + h$
Key properties of gravitational potential:
- Scalar quantity — potential has magnitude only, no direction (unlike field strength $\vec{g}$, which is a vector)
- Negative for all finite $r$ — the negative sign reflects that gravity is attractive; work must be done to move a mass to infinity
- Zero at infinity — by convention, $V = 0$ at $r = \infty$, where there is no gravitational interaction
- Units — J/kg (joules per kilogram), equivalent to m$^2$/s$^2$
Gravitational potential $V$ describes the energy landscape of a gravitational field — just as altitude describes a height landscape. Moving "uphill" in potential (toward less negative values) requires work to be done against gravity.
Calculate the gravitational potential at Earth's surface. $M_E = 5.97 \times 10^{24} \text{ kg}$, $R_E = 6.37 \times 10^6 \text{ m}$.
- Given. $G = 6.67 \times 10^{-11}$, $M_E = 5.97 \times 10^{24} \text{ kg}$, $R_E = 6.37 \times 10^6 \text{ m}$.
- Find. $V$ at Earth's surface.
- Method. Use $V = -GM/r$ with $r = R_E$.
- Solve. $V = -\dfrac{(6.67 \times 10^{-11})(5.97 \times 10^{24})}{6.37 \times 10^6} = -\dfrac{3.98 \times 10^{14}}{6.37 \times 10^6} = -6.25 \times 10^7 \text{ J/kg}$.
- Answer. $V = -62.5 \text{ MJ/kg}$. This means 62.5 MJ of work is needed per kilogram to escape Earth's surface to infinity.
Gravitational potential: $V = U/m = -GM/r$ (J/kg, scalar). Always negative for finite $r$; zero at infinity. Moving to larger $r$ means $V$ becomes less negative (work done against gravity). Work per unit mass between two points: $W/m = \Delta V = V_2 - V_1$. Always use $r = R + h$.
Pause — copy the highlighted potential definition and work-per-unit-mass rule into your book before moving on.
A planet has mass $M$ and radius $R$. The gravitational potential at its surface is…
Connecting the scalar potential to the vector field
We just saw that gravitational potential $V = -GM/r$ is a scalar energy-per-unit-mass. That raises a question: how does the scalar potential connect to the vector field strength $g$? This card answers it → $g = -dV/dr$; a steep slope in the $V$ vs $r$ graph means strong field.
The gravitational field strength $g$ is the negative of the rate at which the potential changes with distance. Where the potential changes rapidly (steep slope), the field is strong; where it barely changes (flat slope), the field is weak.
$g = -\dfrac{dV}{dr}$ — field strength = negative potential gradient
The negative sign means $g$ points in the direction of decreasing $V$ (inward, toward the mass)
For $V = -GM/r$, differentiating gives:
$$\frac{dV}{dr} = \frac{d}{dr}\!\left(-\frac{GM}{r}\right) = \frac{GM}{r^2}$$
Therefore:
$$g = -\frac{dV}{dr} = -\frac{GM}{r^2}$$
The magnitude is the familiar $|g| = GM/r^2$, directed inward.
Graphs of $V$ vs $r$ and $g$ vs $r$
- $V$ vs $r$: $V = -GM/r$ is always negative, approaching zero from below as $r \to \infty$. Steeper near the mass, flatter far away.
- $g$ vs $r$: Magnitude falls as $|g| \propto 1/r^2$ — more rapidly than $|V| \propto 1/r$. The slope of the $V$ vs $r$ graph at any point equals $-g$.
The slope of a $V$ vs $r$ graph at any point gives $-g$ at that point. A steep slope means strong field; a gentle slope means weak field. Where $V$ is flat (far from any mass), $g \approx 0$.
At a point in a gravitational field, $V = -50 \times 10^6 \text{ J/kg}$. At a point 1000 m closer to the central mass, $V = -55 \times 10^6 \text{ J/kg}$. Estimate $g$.
- Given. $V_1 = -50 \times 10^6$, $V_2 = -55 \times 10^6 \text{ J/kg}$, $\Delta r = 1000 \text{ m}$.
- Find. Average gravitational field strength $g$.
- Method. Use $g \approx -\Delta V/\Delta r$ for a finite separation. $\Delta V = V_2 - V_1 = -5 \times 10^6 \text{ J/kg}$.
- Solve. $g \approx -\dfrac{(-5 \times 10^6)}{1000} = 5000 \text{ N/kg}$ (inward).
- Answer. $g = 5000 \text{ N/kg}$ — roughly 500 times Earth's surface gravity, indicating proximity to a very massive body.
Potential gradient: $g = -dV/dr$ (N/kg). Negative sign → $g$ points toward decreasing $V$ (inward). From $V = -GM/r$: differentiating gives $dV/dr = GM/r^2$, so $g = -GM/r^2$ (magnitude $GM/r^2$). For finite differences: $g \approx -\Delta V/\Delta r$. Steep $V$-vs-$r$ slope = strong field.
Add the highlighted potential-gradient relationship to your notes before the check below.
The relationship between gravitational field strength $g$ and potential $V$ is…
Surfaces of constant gravitational potential
We just saw that field strength equals the negative potential gradient ($g = -dV/dr$). That raises a question: what do the surfaces of constant potential look like, and why is no work done moving along them? This card answers it → equipotentials are concentric spheres; $\Delta V = 0$ along them, so work done per unit mass is zero; field lines are always perpendicular.
An equipotential surface is a surface on which the gravitational potential has the same value everywhere. Moving along an equipotential requires no work — all the action happens when you move between equipotentials (different $V$ values).
- Spherical around a point mass — concentric spheres centred on the mass, each sphere at a different value of $r$ and hence $V$
- Closer together near the mass — the spacing indicates field strength: closely spaced means strong field; widely spaced means weak field
- No work done moving along an equipotential — since $\Delta V = 0$, work done per unit mass $= \Delta V = 0$
- Field lines are perpendicular to equipotentials — if $\vec{g}$ had a component along the surface, work would be done; since $W = 0$, $\vec{g}$ must be purely normal
Equipotential surfaces convert a vector problem (field with direction) into a scalar problem (energy per unit mass). The work done per unit mass moving between any two points is simply $W/m = \Delta V$ — independent of path.
Find the radii of the equipotential surfaces at $V = -60$, $-50$, and $-40 \text{ MJ/kg}$ around Earth. $M_E = 5.97 \times 10^{24} \text{ kg}$.
- Method. Rearrange $V = -GM/r$ to give $r = -GM/V$.
- For $V = -60 \text{ MJ/kg}$: $r = \dfrac{3.98 \times 10^{14}}{60 \times 10^6} = 6.63 \times 10^6 \text{ m}$ (260 km above surface).
- For $V = -50 \text{ MJ/kg}$: $r = \dfrac{3.98 \times 10^{14}}{50 \times 10^6} = 7.96 \times 10^6 \text{ m}$ (1590 km altitude).
- For $V = -40 \text{ MJ/kg}$: $r = \dfrac{3.98 \times 10^{14}}{40 \times 10^6} = 9.95 \times 10^6 \text{ m}$ (3580 km altitude).
- Observation. The spacing between surfaces increases with distance, reflecting the $1/r^2$ decrease in field strength — closely spaced near Earth, widely spaced far away.
Equipotential surfaces: $V = \text{const}$ on each surface; concentric spheres around a point mass. No work done moving along an equipotential ($\Delta V = 0 \Rightarrow W/m = 0$). Field lines are always perpendicular to equipotentials. Close spacing = strong field; wide spacing = weak field.
Pause — write the highlighted equipotential rules into your book before moving on.
Equipotential surfaces around a single spherical mass are…
Potential: $V = -GM/r$ (J/kg, scalar)
Field from gradient: $g = -dV/dr = -GM/r^2$ (N/kg, vector magnitude)
Work per unit mass: $W/m = \Delta V$
Surface potential: $V_{\text{surface}} = -GM/R$
Distance: $r = R_{\text{planet}} + h$ — always centre-to-centre
Three of the following statements about gravitational potential are correct. Pick the odd one out.
NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE, 2002–2017) used two satellites in the same orbit measuring changes in distance to map Earth's gravitational potential with unprecedented precision.
As the lead satellite approaches a region of stronger gravity, it accelerates, changing the inter-satellite distance. By tracking these changes, GRACE mapped variations in $V = -GM/r$ — detecting groundwater depletion (over 200 km³ lost in India 2002–2008), Greenland ice mass loss (~280 Gt/yr), and post-glacial rebound.
GRACE-FO (2018 onward) uses laser ranging for even higher precision — literally tracking changes in equipotential surfaces over time.
The GRACE satellites detect changes in Earth's gravitational potential by measuring…
Practise calculating gravitational potential and field strength
- Find the gravitational potential at $r = 2R_E$ from Earth's centre ($R_E = 6.37 \times 10^6 \text{ m}$). Express your answer in MJ/kg.
- If the gravitational potential changes from $-40 \text{ MJ/kg}$ to $-45 \text{ MJ/kg}$ over a distance of 500 km, estimate the average gravitational field strength in this region.
- Describe the shape of equipotential surfaces for two equal masses placed close together. How do they differ from those around a single mass?
Drill check — the gravitational potential at the surface of the Moon ($M = 7.35 \times 10^{22} \text{ kg}$, $R = 1.74 \times 10^6 \text{ m}$) is approximately _____ MJ/kg (give 2 significant figures, include the sign).
Explain the relationship between $V$ and $g$
A student looks at a graph of $V$ vs $r$ for a planet and says: "The curve is steepest near the planet, so the potential is strongest there." Explain why this reasoning is incorrect. In your answer, discuss: (a) what the steepness of the $V$ vs $r$ graph represents, (b) how potential itself varies with $r$, and (c) the difference between potential and field strength.
The work done moving a mass along an equipotential surface is…
Misconceptions — final check
Copy into your books
Key Definitions
- $V = -GM/r$ — gravitational potential (J/kg, scalar)
- $dV/dr$ — potential gradient (rate of change of $V$)
- Equipotential: surface of constant $V$
- $V = 0$ at infinity (convention)
Key Formulae
- $V = -GM/r$
- $g = -dV/dr = -GM/r^2$
- $W/m = \Delta V$ (work per unit mass)
- $r = -GM/V$ (finding radius from potential)
Important Points
- $V$ is a scalar; $g$ is a vector
- $V$ always negative for finite $r$
- Steeper $V$ vs $r$ slope = stronger field
- Work along equipotential = zero
- Field lines ⊥ equipotentials
Common Errors
- Confusing $V$ (J/kg) with $U$ (J)
- Treating $V$ as a vector
- Assuming equipotentials = constant $g$
- Dropping the negative sign in $V = -GM/r$
- Using $h$ instead of $r = R + h$
Which statement correctly describes gravitational potential $V$?
A fresh five-question set drawn from this lesson's bank — feedback shown immediately. +5 XP per correct · +25 XP all correct
Pick your answer, then rate your confidence — that tells the system what to drill next.
ApplyBand 4(3 marks) 1. Calculate the gravitational potential at the surface of the Moon ($M = 7.35 \times 10^{22} \text{ kg}$, $R = 1.74 \times 10^6 \text{ m}$). How much work is needed per kilogram to move a payload from the Moon's surface to infinity?
1 mark: correct substitution · 1 mark: correct $V$ · 1 mark: correct work per unit mass = $|V|$
ApplyBand 5(3 marks) 2. The gravitational potential at distance $r$ from Earth's centre is $-40 \text{ MJ/kg}$. At $r + 2000 \text{ km}$, it is $-35 \text{ MJ/kg}$. Estimate the average gravitational field strength in this region.
1 mark: correct formula $g \approx -\Delta V/\Delta r$ · 1 mark: correct $\Delta V$ · 1 mark: correct $g$ with units
EvaluateBand 6(4 marks) 3. Evaluate the usefulness of representing gravitational fields using equipotential surfaces rather than field lines. Discuss the advantages of each representation and when one is more informative than the other.
1 mark: equipotentials — scalar, energy calculation advantage · 1 mark: equipotentials — no direction info · 1 mark: field lines — force direction advantage · 1 mark: comparison — complementary, best used together
Show all answers
Multiple choice
MC answers and full explanations are shown inline as you complete each question. Use the retry button to attempt a fresh set drawn from the lesson bank.
Short Answer — Model Answers
Q1 (3 marks): $V = -GM/R = -\dfrac{(6.67 \times 10^{-11})(7.35 \times 10^{22})}{1.74 \times 10^6} = -\dfrac{4.90 \times 10^{12}}{1.74 \times 10^6} = -2.82 \times 10^6 \text{ J/kg}$ (2 marks). Work to infinity per kilogram: $W/m = \Delta V = V_\infty - V_{\text{surface}} = 0 - (-2.82) = +2.82 \text{ MJ/kg}$ (1 mark).
Q2 (3 marks): $g \approx -\Delta V/\Delta r$ (1 mark). $\Delta V = (-35 \times 10^6) - (-40 \times 10^6) = +5 \times 10^6 \text{ J/kg}$. $\Delta r = 2 \times 10^6 \text{ m}$. $g = -5 \times 10^6 / (2 \times 10^6) = -2.5 \text{ N/kg}$ (magnitude $2.5 \text{ N/kg}$, directed inward) (2 marks).
Q3 (4 marks): Equipotential surfaces are scalar — work done between points is simply $\Delta V$, enabling direct energy calculations (escape velocity, orbital changes) without vector arithmetic (1 mark). Disadvantage: they do not show the direction of the gravitational force — you cannot immediately see which way a mass will accelerate (1 mark). Field lines show force direction at every point; their density indicates field strength and the tangent gives acceleration direction (1 mark). Comparison: equipotentials are best for energy problems; field lines are best for motion and force problems. The two representations are complementary — field lines are always perpendicular to equipotential surfaces, and using both gives a complete picture (1 mark).
Gravitational potential energy — match orbital mechanics to field conditions. Pure practice that hammers home the scalar energy landscape.
At the start you were asked about the US Department of Defense GPS system (1978–1994) and the 45 μs/day clock correction applied to 24 satellites at 20,200 km altitude.
The gravitational potential at GPS orbit is $V_{\text{GPS}} = -GM/r = -(3.98 \times 10^{14})/(2.636 \times 10^7) = -1.51 \times 10^7 \text{ J/kg}$. At Earth's surface: $V_{\text{surface}} = -6.26 \times 10^7 \text{ J/kg}$. The potential increases (becomes less negative) as you move away from Earth — $V$ increases from $-6.26 \times 10^7$ to $-1.51 \times 10^7$ J/kg as you rise to GPS altitude. The 45 μs/day general relativistic correction exploits this potential difference: clocks in weaker gravitational fields run faster. Without it, GPS position errors would accumulate at 10 km per day. Has your prediction held up?