Centre of mass and centre of gravity

AI Thread Summary
The center of mass and center of gravity are distinct concepts, with the center of mass being a weighted average of an object's mass distribution, while the center of gravity is influenced by gravitational forces acting on that mass. In uniform gravitational fields, the two points can be considered the same for practical purposes, especially in short-distance scenarios. However, in cases with varying gravitational strength, such as a long rod near Earth, the center of gravity can differ significantly from the center of mass. For example, in a vertical rod, the center of gravity may be located below the center of mass due to the gravitational gradient. Understanding this distinction is important in physics, particularly in applications involving large structures like space elevators.
asdff529
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Hi,today my teacher said that there is a little bit different between centre of mass and centre of gravity.
But he said there is no different between them in my level(teenager)
What is the different between them and why we can ignore the differences?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The center of gravity (not necessarily unique) of some object is a point such that the gravitational force acting on a point mass with the same mass as the object and located at that point is the same as the gravitational force acting on the object.

The center of mass of some object has nothing to do with gravity. It is a weighted average of the position of the object, where the weighting is by mass in the case of a collection of objects, or by density in the case of a continuum.


To illustrate the difference, consider a long rod of mass m and length L that is oriented vertically such that the bottom of the rod is a distance r from the center of the Earth. The hypothetical space elevator is a good example. The center of the mass is located halfway up the rod at a distance rCoM=r+L/2 from the center of the Earth. With a little but of calculus, the gravitational force acting on the rod is GMEm/(r(r+L)). Thus the center of gravity is given by rCoG2=r(r+L)=r2+rL. Note that this is below the center of mass. If the rod is very long (e.g., a space elevator), the center of gravity will be well below the center of mass.
 
Thanks, D.H. If I understand what you have said correctly, if the gravitational force were constant, rather than depending on "1/r^2", then "center of mass" and "center of gravity" would be exactly the same. Of course, if, as in most problems, the distances are short enought that gravitational force is constant to a good approximation, then center of mass and center of gravity are the same to a good approximation.
 
The center of gravity per the definition I gave (not mine; it is a fairly standard definition) is not well-defined in a uniform gravity field. The gravitational force is tautologically the same everywhere in a uniform field. This means any point will do, but it is customary to pick the center of mass as the center of gravity.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top