Does Gravity Depend on ratio of mass between objects?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter sigh hens
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity Mass Ratio
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between mass and gravitational force, particularly questioning whether gravity depends on the ratio of mass between two objects. Participants explore concepts from Newtonian physics, including gravitational force, acceleration due to gravity, and the implications of mass in gravitational interactions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about how gravitational force varies with different mass combinations, despite the total mass remaining constant.
  • One participant clarifies that gravity produces acceleration rather than force, suggesting that gravitational force depends on the product of the masses involved.
  • Another participant questions the relevance of the sum of masses in determining gravitational force.
  • Some argue that more mass leads to more gravity and thus more gravitational force, while others challenge this understanding by discussing the concept of gravitational concentration.
  • A participant provides an analogy involving a pebble and the Earth to illustrate the difference between gravitational force and mass distribution.
  • Another participant reiterates that the gravitational force depends on both masses and emphasizes the action-reaction principle from Newton's Third Law.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the relationship between mass and gravitational force, with multiple competing views and ongoing confusion about the concepts involved.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty regarding the definitions of gravitational force and gravity, as well as the implications of mass distribution in gravitational interactions.

sigh hens
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I'm no physicist but this really doesn't make sense to me.


Simple Newtonian physics says that gravity is dependent on mass and that an object with more mass will have more gravity, right?

well here's an equation I'm sure most of you are familiar with...

F = G*m1*m2/r^2

heres my problem...

m1 = 20
m2 = 1
r = 10

then F will = .2G

another example...

m1 = 19
m2 = 2
r = 10

then F will = .38G


In each example the mass of m1 and m2 add up to 21 and yet the gravitational force (F) is different. What is the rationale behind this? I thought all objects with the same mass had the same gravitational force no matter how you diveded them (assuming the same r value).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The issue is that gravity really produces an acceleration, not a force. You can easily see this by keeping m1 the same, but changing m2. Then if you use F=ma (m=m2 in this case) you'll see that it's always true that a=G*m1/r^2. I think the statement "all objects with the same mass had the same gravitational force" would refer only to two objects of identical mass which are an identical distance away from an object of a particular mass.
 
so is there any real significance to the fact that F is different even though the mass of m1 and m2 in both examples add up to the same?

I understand that gravity = a = G*m1/r^2 I think I am more confused about what F is really representative of.
 
Gravitational force is proportional to the product of the masses. Why do you think that the sum of masses is relevant to anything?
 
the more mass, the more gravity. I thought it would be logical to extend this so that... the more mass, the more gravity, the more gravitational force. I think I'm just lost as to the true meaning of Fgrav.

I don't really understand how something can have more gravity but less gravitational force.
 
Sigh, I'm wondering here if you're mistaking the gravitational concentration for force. Since gravity is measured from the centres of the masses involved, a dense body will have a higher local field than a less dense one. As an example, a 5 solar mass star that collapses into a black hole will still have the same original gravity field (adjusted for the mass lost during the transition), but you can get so much closer to the centre of the BH that the gravity you feel is incredibly concentrated. With the original star, you'd get fried a few thousand times farther away. (I'll leave the rest to Space Tiger or similar.)
 
Last edited:
Don't make it more complex than it is. Gravity and 'gravitational force' are the same thing.

Imagine a single pebble on the surface of the earth. It does not weigh very much, correct? In other words, it doesn't have a very large 'gravitational force' with the earth, even when held 1 inch above the surface.

Now imagine splitting the Earth in two equal halves and trying to hold them 1 inch apart...the force would be tremendous. In both examples, the total mass involved is the same.
 
Last edited:
Excellent analogy, King. I wish that I'd thought of it. (Well, I'll steal it at the earliest opportunity.)
 
Sigh,

Simple Newtonian physics says that gravity is dependent on mass and that an object with more mass will have more gravity, right?

Absolutely! But your example isn't talking about an object; it is about two objects. If you increase the mass of either object in your example then, clearly, the gravitational force it exerts increases, i.e. you have "more gravity."

The expression of Newton's Law of Gravity that you wrote shows the force on a second object due to the gravitational pull of the first object. That force depends on both the mass of the "gravitating" object and the mass of the object being acted upon by the gravitating object. Note that the magnitude of the forces each exerts on the other are the same in accordance with Newton's Third Law of Motion (action-reaction).

In your example, you increase the mass of one object (which "increases its gravity") but you decrease the mass of the other (which reduces the force acting on it). You succeeded in increasing the strength of the gravitational field but gave it a smaller mass to act on.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K