Potential of spherical and non-spherical mass distributions?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the gravitational potential of a spherical planet and whether a non-spherical mass distribution can produce the same external potential of -GM/r. It is established that while the potential outside a spherical mass distribution behaves as if all mass is concentrated at a point, the internal mass distribution can be non-spherical without affecting external observations. The center of mass for non-spherical distributions shifts toward regions of higher density, but inside a spherical mass distribution, a particle does not experience forces from non-spherical distortions. The gravitational field remains uniform on the surface of a spherical distribution, while non-spherical distributions may not exhibit this uniformity. Ultimately, if an external observer cannot discern the shape of the mass distribution, it may be treated as spherical.
Schmetterling
Messages
31
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Suppose a planet whose surface is spherical and the gravitational potential exterior to it is exactly -GM/r, like that of a point mass. Is it possible to know if the inner mass distribution is actually shperically symmetric? Can a non-spherical mass distribution produce such an external potential? If yes, give an example.

Homework Equations



Newton's shell theorems, Gauss' law

The Attempt at a Solution



"The potential out of any spherical distribution of mass is like if all the mass was in a point", but this is true for shells of uniform density. I remember that a particle inside of the sphere doesn't feel any forces regardless the mass distribution, but outside?
If we use a "gaussian surface" to enclose such a non-spherical mass distribution, Gauss' law gives the total mass, so internal distribution wouldn't be important, but, for example, inhomogeneities in Earth's density can affect nearby planetary bodies. Then? I'm confused.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The potential out of any distribution of mass is like if all the mass was in a point... at the center of mass of the distribution.

What happens to the center of mass if the distribution is not spherical?
Is the mass of spherical shells not spherically distributed?
Will a particle inside a spherical distribution of mass experience forces from non-spherical distortions?
 
Simon Bridge said:
The potential out of any distribution of mass is like if all the mass was in a point... at the center of mass of the distribution.

What happens to the center of mass if the distribution is not spherical?
Its location will be displaced fron the geometric center towards where the density is greater... Oh, wait, I am confusing a spherical distribution with a homogeneous one!
If the distribution is uniform, either spherical or not, the center of mass will coincide with the geometric center, right?

Simon Bridge said:
Is the mass of spherical shells not spherically distributed?
It is spherically distributed, it can vary whit radius, but shells have spherical symmetry.

Simon Bridge said:
Will a particle inside a spherical distribution of mass experience forces from non-spherical distortions?
Inside? Uhmmm... No... :rolleyes:
 
The bits you had trouble with are key to your problem.

You've figured that non-uniform distributions can be determined from outside by comparing the geometric center with the gravitational center. This raised the possibility that a uniform distribution will fit the criteria ... another characteristic of a spherical distribution of mass is that the gravitational equipotential surfaces are spheres (i.e. the grav field radiates equally in all directions). If you walk around the surface, gravity will have the same force everywhere you go. Is this true for non-spherical distributions?

Of course - if you are outside the object and you cannot tell by looking at it that it is non-spherical then it must be outwardly spherical (or blocked from view).For the particle inside a sphere of mass - see if you can work out if it feels a gravitational pull from, say, another sphere right next to it.
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top