トピックアウトライン

  • The Mathematics behind Rockets and Propulsion 

    Summer 2025

    Collaborators: Jack Colvin (University of Chicago Intern)

    Using Resources provided by Stevan Akerly (NSS Space Ambassadors Lead)

    Loretta Hall (NSS Space Ambassador)

    Kevin Simmons (NSS Space Ambassador & BLUECUBEAEROSPACE CEO)

    Frances Dellutri (NSS Director of Education)

    Background

    Have you ever wondered how rockets are able to escape Earth’s gravity, a force that acted as an invisible separator between humanity and the cosmos for millennia, allowing us to finally reach the outer edges of our solar system? Behind every dramatic, fiery launch exists a world of precise equations, physics, and mathematics that define their trajectories and mechanics. Before we can begin to understand how to engineer rockets, we must first understand the mechanics of what a rocket even is, and how it flies. In this lesson, we’ll uncover the hidden worlds of Newtonian mechanics and Einstein’s relativity and gravity, and understand how these conceptions of reality impact our understanding of rockets. Furthermore, we will look towards the future: at how a well-developed understanding of these physical systems can point us towards new, better rockets that may allow us to go one level further in our dream of exploring the cosmos. 

    Lesson Goals: 

    • Understand basic propulsion and how it relates to Newton’s second and third laws of motion

    • Understand the similarities and differences between Einstein's and Newton’s Conceptions of Gravity

    • Understand the geometry involved in how objects travel when under the influence of gravity, the concept of escape velocity, and how this impacts rocket design 

    • Think about possible alternatives to current propulsion systems that could be used going forward

    Education Standards


    Related Lessons

    Rocket Engineering: https://spacedge.nss.org/course/view.php?id=326

    Rocketry:  https://spacedge.nss.org/course/view.php?id=51

    Recent Space Developments: https://spacedge.nss.org/course/view.php?id=47#section-2

    Newton's Greatest Contribution to Mankind: https://spacedge.nss.org/course/view.php?id=255#section-2


    Standards

  • Part 1: Newton's Laws of Motion

    If you would like to learn more about Newton's Laws, please visit our Newton's Greatest Contributions to Mankind lesson curated by Peter Higgins, Phd

    Before we begin to understand how rockets work, we need to first understand what rockets are by taking a brief dive into Newtonian Mechanics. Specifically, we want to consider his second and third laws of motion. Newton's second law of motion states that F = ma, or perhaps more intuitively, F/m = a, where F represents a force placed upon an object, like an invisible (or visible) push, a is the acceleration, or change in velocity over time, of that object due to that push, and m is the object's mass. This law is thus simply saying that if we have two identical forces placed upon two objects with different masses, the heavier one will accelerate less than the lighter one. You are probably already familiar with this principle: it is harder to get a heavy object moving than a lighter one. 


    Activity 1: Try rolling 2 objects of very different sizes, say a tennis ball and a basketball. Which one feels harder to push? Which one can you push faster? Try to explain these differences based on Newton’s 2nd Law. 


    The other tool we need to begin understanding rockets is Newton’s 3rd law of motion, which states that every action has an equal and opposite reaction, or, in simpler terms, that if you apply a force on an object, that object pushes back against you with an equal force in the opposite direction. While maybe slightly less intuitive than the 2nd law, we still encounter this phenomenon on a daily basis. It is why, for example, the harder you push against a wall, the more solid it feels. 


    Rockets can be seen as any system that uses these two laws to generate a force of thrust, which is what we call the force that accelerates a rocket upwards. A traditional rocket uses the burning and expulsion of huge amounts of fuel to generate that upward force. Specifically, the force of that fuel being expelled downwards creates an equal and opposite force, by Newton's 3rd law, that pushes the rocket upwards. Technically, rockets don't need to look like this. In fact, we can all be rockets. If we throw any object downwards, it will put an equal and opposite upwards force on us, just like the exhaust that comes out of a rocket. What is the difference then? Why don’t we fly up into space every time we drop our pencils on the floor? This is where F = ma comes into play, or rather a slightly revised version:  F = ṁve, where ṁ is the change in mass over time due to the ejection of exhaust, ve is the exhaust velocity, and F is the thrust force. While this equation may look slightly different than the traditional F = ma, the idea is the same: the larger the change in an object's mass times velocity (a quantity called momentum), the larger the upward force. Thus, while our human-pencil rocket has a tiny change in momentum (a pencil weighs very little and we throw it at a very small velocity), the exhaust spit out by a rocket both has a huge mass, and moves very quickly, thus exerting a much greater force one that is able to lift thousands of tons of steel into the air. 

    An animation depciting how Newton's 3rd Law works to power rockets


    One last Newtonian consideration rocket scientists have to take into account is air resistance. Even though it may not seem like it, air is made up of tons of tiny, fast-moving atoms. When we bump into them, they slow us down, just like any other substance. However, unlike in a solid or a liquid, these atoms are very far apart, so when we aren’t moving very fast, we don’t collide with very many of these particles and thus we don’t feel them push us backwards very much. However, at faster speeds, we begin to bump into more of these particles, and we feel a much stronger backwards force. This is probably familiar to you: wind is an example of how strong air resistance can feel when those particles begin moving at high speeds. The force we feel from wind is really just millions of air particles bumping into us and pushing us backwards. 

    Since rockets travel many times faster than wind, this effect becomes even more pronounced. Not only does it make the thrust force needed to get off the ground that much greater, but it can even cause physical damage to a rocket due to the sheer speed and heat of air particles clashing with and rubbing against the metal rocket. This force sometimes becomes so severe that rockets have to use less than maximum thrust until they get to a higher, thinner level in the atmosphere in order to reduce stress and avoid potential structural damage. 


    Ducross, D. (2024). Cluster satellite reentering Earth’s atmosphere. photograph. 

    https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Images/2024/08/Cluster_satellite_reentering_Earth_s_atmosphere 


  • Gravity: The biggest Challenge to Rocket Design

    The biggest challenge to rocket design, and for our species’ ability to explore anywhere outside of the little bubble we call Earth, is gravity. Gravity is a force we feel every day – it is what keeps us on the ground – but it is also what makes it so hard to design a rocket that can reach space. It would be pretty easy to launch a rocket very far if nothing was pushing (or in this case, perhaps pulling) it backwards. However, under the force of gravity, the story is completely different. As we’ll soon learn, the force of gravity increases with the mass of an object, and rockets are incredibly massive, often weighing thousands of tons. Overcoming that gravitational pull requires an enormous amount of thrust.

    Therefore, truly understanding rocket design also requires understanding how gravity works so we can find ways to overcome it. Yet again, Newton can help us with this. Not only did he observe that the force that keeps Earth in orbit was the same as the force that keeps us on Earth, but he was also able to quantify that force by the equation Fg = GMm/r2. This formula is intuitive: Objects that have more mass, like Earth, create a stronger attractive force, and that force decreases with distance (squared). Just from this formula, you can probably think of a few easy ways to start fighting back against gravity. Lighter rockets will be affected less by gravity, and launching rockets from space instead of Earth’s surface, where r is much larger, also helps significantly. However, while Newton was able to quantify the force of gravity, he was unable to explain where it comes from. Thus, to truly understand how this force works, we must turn to Einstein and Relativity.  


    Instead of thinking about gravity as a force, Einstein thought of it as a property of space-time itself. Specifically, massive objects bend space around them, creating what he called gravitational wells. The attraction created by gravity arises naturally out of this conception, and works kind of like placing a bowling ball on a taught bedsheet. The mass of the ball creates a well in the sheet (analogous to our gravitational well), and other objects that roll along the sheet will appear to be “pulled” towards the bowling ball due to the well that it creates. The larger the bowling ball, the larger that well will be, and the stronger the attractive force will appear. Amazingly, all of Einstein’s work was exclusively theoretical. Evidence in favor of his theory – such as photons being observed to travel in curved paths, as if attracted by massive objects, despite having no mass themselves – was first observed around 30-40 years after his death. 

    Visual representation of gravitational wells

    Illustration by Sain Mary’s University, https://demos.smu.ca/how-tos/160-make-your-own-gravity-well 


    Activity 2: Demos of Gravity using a Skateboarder and a Bedsheet:

    Follow these links:

    https://phet.colorado.edu/sims/html/energy-skate-park/latest/energy-skate-park_all.html, and watch the video

    And answer the questions below: 

    1. What is similar about these demos to a gravitational well? What is different?

    2. For the skateboard demo only: Can you find a way to get the skateboarder to “escape” the ramp? If so, how did you do it? 
    3. For the skateboard demo only: Using the analogy of the skate ramp as a gravitational well, how might this connect to rockets? 
    ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Just like our skateboarder, any rocket that wants to reach space needs to reach a certain "escape energy" to overcome the gravitational pull that keeps it tethered to Earth. Rockets achieve this by burning fuel to generate propulsion, steadily increasing their kinetic energy until they reach the required speed. To completely break free from Earth’s gravity without needing further thrust, a rocket (or any object) would need to reach what’s called escape velocity, which for Earth is about 11,200 m/s. This enormous speed shows just how challenging it is to design rockets capable of leaving Earth entirely. Even just to enter Low Earth Orbit, a speed of 7,800 m/s is required, still no small task. 

    Crucial to truly understanding how gravity works is understanding how it is connected to geometry. Specifically, objects under the effect of a gravitational field can only move in four shapes, which are called conic sections: a parabola, an ellipse, a circle, and a hyperbola. Objects that are thrown on the surface of a massive body that don’t have enough velocity to enter orbit travel in a parabola (think of the path followed by a football or basketball). Objects with enough velocity to enter orbit but not enough to escape that orbit travel in elliptical or circular paths, like the moon does around Earth. Finally, objects with enough velocity to escape the gravitational field of a massive body entirely travel in a hyperbola, almost being “slingshotted” off Earth’s gravitational field. Throughout these processes, potential and kinetic energy are continuously being transformed into each other, but the sum of the two – mechanical energy – is always conserved (except for minor losses due to friction and heat). Again, the key is thus to have enough initial kinetic energy to escape from the well of negative energy created by gravity. 


    Credit to freeimages.com

  • Measuring the Efficiency of Rockets

    Now that we understand how rockets work, and how they are able to escape Earth’s surface, we can begin to evaluate just how effectively different rockets are able to achieve this goal. We intuitively know that a model rocket we create in our backyard is in some way “worse” than Saturn V, but why? 

    The first and easiest metric to measure rocket efficiency is simply maximum thrust, and in many cases, this metric is extremely helpful in understanding the power of a rocket. Our backyard rocket is worse than Saturn V because it provides a way smaller force of thrust – maybe a couple tens of pounds as opposed to the millions achieved by Saturn V.

    However, in certain circumstances, simply looking at the maximum thrust an engine can provide is insufficient to understand how efficient it is. For example, how do we evaluate an engine that can provide millions of pounds of thrust, but only for a moment, against an engine that can provide much less thrust, but for a longer amount of time? Suddenly, it becomes much less clear which rocket is more efficient. A new unit called impulse is needed, which quantifies a force that acts on a mass over a specific length of time, and thus can be found by the formula I = F * Δt (or for a variable force, I = ∫F dt). A rocket can be considered more efficient than another if it is able to provide not just a larger maximum thrust, but rather a larger total impulse, given the same amount and type of fuel. 

    Specifically, the unit used to measure the efficiency of rocket engines is called Specific Impulse (ISP), which is calculated as a ratio of thrust force to propellant flow rate, and thus can be understood as how much thrust an engine can produce per unit of propellant consumed. Although it is measured in seconds, what it really reflects is how long one unit of propellant can produce thrust, and thus it is really a unit of impulse. A higher ISP means the engine is more efficient, as it can maintain a given thrust for a longer time using the same amount of fuel. Specific impulse can also be used to compare the efficiency of different fuel types and propulsion systems.

     
    graph of specific impulse!
    Nasa Image figure found at
    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20140002716/downloads/20140002716.pdf  

    This graph shows how specific impuse can be used to evaluate different fuel types. Specifically, we can see that for all types of engines, hydrogen fuel has a higher specific impulse than hydrocarbon fuel (like gasoline or kerosene), explaining why it is often said to be "more efficient". 

    A final method of measuring efficiency is how much of the total chemical energy contained within a certain fuel is converted into kinetic energy that moves the rocket forwards. This is calculated by taking the kinetic energy of the expelled exhaust, calculated as E of Thrust ​= ½ *m*v^2 where m is the mass of the fuel and v is the effective exhaust velocity, and dividing by the total chemical energy contained within the fuel, calculated as m*q, where q is the energy released per kg of fuel. This unit defines as a percentage how much of the fuel goes towards pushing the rocket forwards as opposed to losses due to heat, noise, and light during combustion. 

    While technical efficiency is crucial, there's another key factor to consider: financial efficiency. Rockets are incredibly complex machines and are therefore extremely expensive to build and launch. It has historically cost around $10,000 per pound to send something into space. Because of this, designing rockets that are not only physically efficient but also economically viable is essential for the future of space exploration. Along with this motivation comes the idea of reusability. Modern rocket engines are often built to be reusable for many flights, which makes them much more financially viable than having to remake every part of a rocket after each flight. For example, companies like SpaceX have pioneered the technology of propulsive landing, where the booster rockets used to lift stage 1 off the ground are used again to land the outer shell of the rocket back down to be re-used, saving about 75% of the cost of building a new rocket. Improvements in financial efficiency have helped the cost of going to space plummet in the last 50 years. 

    Launch CostsRocket

    There are complications to this focus on reusability. While in the long run, making rockets reusable saves money, in the short term, engineering reusable parts is extremely expensive. Furthermore, these improvements are rendered useless should a rocket crash or burn up in the atmosphere. The economic side of rocket mathematics thus represents yet another piece of the puzzle that companies have to consider when designing rockets.

    If you would like to learn more about rockets and efficiency, and how rocket efficiency has improved greatly over the years, visit our lessons on Rocketry and Recent Space Developments!


  • The Future of Rocketry

    The difficulty of escaping Earth’s gravity creates a distinct challenge for interstellar travel. Even with the breakneck speeds that rockets are able to achieve, they become slowed down so much by Earth’s gravitational field that even reaching the closest star to us would take millennia. As discussed earlier, there is also a limit on how much we can increase our initial speed given our current fuel sources: at a certain point, adding more liquid or solid fuel is actually detrimental to creating a faster rocket, due to Newton’s 2nd law. Adding more weight, even in fuel, limits the maximum acceleration we can achieve. Thus, escaping our solar system seems to be a barrier just as unbreakable as escaping the surface of Earth was.

    While the primary fuel source of modern rockets remains chemical propulsion, there are some promising alternatives that could make it possible in the future to bridge the gap between our little pocket of the universe and everywhere else. One possibility could be nuclear energy, which harnesses the energy stored within the nuclei of atoms by splitting them in half. This energy could then be used to power an engine or charge a battery to store much more fuel while taking up much less space within the rocket itself. Another possibility is harnessing the power of the sun, whether by using solar panels or mirrors to convert solar energy into usable energy, or by using the tiny amounts of force contained in each photon to push our rocket forward using solar sails. These solutions are not only possible with our current technology, but have also already begun to be experimented with in real rocket and satellite designs. 

    Schweighart, B. (2024). Solar Sail Turntable With Sun. Nasa Image Archive. NASA. Retrieved from https://images.nasa.gov/details/ACS3_SolarSailTurntableWithSun.  

    Yet more potential solutions remain impractical or impossible in the modern day, yet represent promising ideas for the future of rocket science. Lasers could be used to physically push a spaceship forward, much like a solar sail, but with an even stronger, directed force. This method could be used alongside existing means of propulsion, and has been researched by NASA, but remains largely in the theoretical phase. An even more futuristic possibility could be a real-world implementation of a “warp drive”. This technology would take advantage of the moldability of space time by compressing space ahead of the spaceship and expanding space behind it in order to be able to travel vast distances in a fraction of the usual time. We are certainly not ready to create this sort of technology at this point in time, however we can conceptualize it and use math to verify whether it is at least possible or not. In truth, we may need to someday create technologies like this if we want to explore all corners of the universe. 

    Kakaes, K. (2013, April 1). Faster-than-light drive. Popular Science. https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2013-03/faster-light-drive/ 

  • Enrichment: The Math Behind Relativity

    Behind the scenes of many of these topics, particularly relativity and gravity, is some very interesting advanced math. Specifically, since Space-Time is 4D, we require brand new mathematical tools that are equipped to handle the 4th dimension in order to truly understand how it works or what it even looks like. One tool that can help us to visualize 4d space is a contour map. Just like 3d mountains can be visualized by a set of 2D cross sections on a terrain map, we can visualize the 4-dimensional gravitational peaks and wells created by massive bodies in space-time by using a set of cross sections in the much more familiar 3rd dimension. The steepness and direction of the slope at every point on this 3d map, given by a function called the gradient, can construct a vector field describing the strength and direction of the force of gravity at every point in 3D space. 

    Contour map

    NASA. (2016). Google Earth Contour Image. Nasa Image Archive. Retrieved from https://images.nasa.gov/details/PIA20893

    Activity: Go to https://www.desmos.com/calculator/1zyo0kqumm And play around with the multivariable function (represented in desmos by a contour map). Try to visualize what that function might look like in 3D. Describe how the vector field overlaid on top of the function reacts to changes in the function. How are the vector field and the contour plot related to one another? 

    ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Another tool that can help us understand 4D space are tensors, which are mathematical objects that can be understood as 4x4 matrices. The 4x4 dimensionality of these objects reflects the 4D nature of the space that they represent. Specifically, we can use tensors that describe the momentum, mass, and energy distributions across all of space-time in order to calculate a new tensor that represents the curvature of space-time at every single point, again in the form of a 4x4 matrix. The equations that connect these objects together are called Einstein's field equations, and we have included resources that provide more extensive discussions of what these equations actually are at the end of this lesson. 

    Einstein's Field Equation

    The above image depicts Einstein's field equations, where G is the Einstein tensor which describes the curvature of space, g is the metric tensor which accounts for the innate energy density of empty space, and T is the stress tensor, which describes the distribution of mass and momentum in 4d space. The other terms are constants. While this may seem to be a single equation, it actually represents 16 separate equations, as each term is actually a 4x4 matrix. 

    The combination of these mathematical tools has led us to the conclusion that our universe is not actually flat, but rather has a shape of its own that resembles a 4-dimensional version of a 3D object called a paraboloid. It is difficult to picture exactly what it means for 4D space to be “flat” or “curved”, however we can understand the consequences geometrically. Specifically, many of the classic geometric laws that we have become familiar with, such as the angles in a triangle adding to 180 degrees, do not hold in a universe that is not flat. While at distances close to us, these approximations are extremely accurate, when observing parts of the universe that are farther away, it is possible, for example, that the angles in a triangle add up to more or less than 180 degrees. 

    Image of a Hyperbaloid

    A 3d depiction of what a hyperboloid looks like, taken from Desmos' 3d graphic calculator


  • Lesson Conclusion & Additional Materials

    Throughout this lesson, we’ve seen that rockets aren’t just feats of engineering or construction, but are also triumphs of mathematics and physics that transform abstract equations into the power to access parts of the universe previously thought to be unreachable. By exploring Newton’s second and third laws, we discovered how thrust is generated and why even the smallest rockets still obey the same fundamental principles as the mighty Saturn V. We then dove into the challenge that makes rocket design so demanding –  Earth’s gravity – first described by Newton as a force pulling masses together, and later reimagined by Einstein as the bending of space-time itself.

    Using these mathematical tools, we learned how the paths rockets take are determined by conic sections, elegantly linking the unimaginably complex mathematics behind both rockets and space themselves to simple geometry. We also uncovered how engineers measure rocket efficiency not just by raw power, but by total impulse, specific impulse, cost, availability of fuel, and how effectively fuel burns and turns chemical energy into kinetic energy. Finally, we looked into potential alternate sources of propulsion, from nuclear power and solar sails to abstract ideas like warp drives, showing that the mathematics of rockets is not only about designing rockets today, but also about imagining how to travel even further tomorrow.

    If you would like to learn about rockets from the perspective of an engineer, visit our Rocketry Engineering lesson. If you would like to know more about the history of rocketry, and specifically Robert Goddard, the brilliant mind that pioneered modern rocketry, visit our biography about Goddard here (url), or the page for our Goddard 100 contest, celebrating his life's work and achievements here (url). Finally, visit the NSS Space Forum to learn more about rockets, propulsion, and any other recent developments on space science! 

    Goddard Contributions

  • Additional Resources

    NSS Blog: An online blog containing posts about many space-related topics, including rockets and propulsion

    https://nss.org/category/blog/

    NSS Space Forum: a forum containing videos produced by NSS space ambassadors about anything space related

    https://nss.org/nss-space-forums/

    Build your own model rockets through Estes rockets!

    https://estesrockets.com/?

    NASA Goddard Flight Center Website: A Website containing hundreds of math and engineering problems related to rocketry!

    https://spacemath.gsfc.nasa.gov/SpaceMath.html

    Math and Rockets in Sci Fi Movies (6:25 duration): A video discussing places where math and science show up in sci-fi movies!



    A full video of a SpaceX Rocket Launch! (15:42 duration)



    Additional Relativity Resources: 

    Additional Multivariable Functions Resources:

    Additional Tensors Resources:
    •  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ptMTLzV4-I
    •  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ptMTLzV4-I
    •  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl7Tk2zohQU




  • Postcards to Space!

    Send a Postcard to Space through NSS Supported Blue Origin Club For The Future initiative!

    Visit: SpacEdge Academy Postcards in Space Course