A gravity conundrum involving a solid cylinder

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the gravitational force exerted by a solid cylinder on a point mass located at its top. Participants explore the implications of calculating gravitational force based on different segments of the cylinder and question the validity of these calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant calculates the gravitational force between a point mass and a solid cylinder, noting that the force from the entire cylinder is GmM/k², while the force from just the top half of the cylinder appears to be 2GmM/k².
  • Another participant points out that the initial calculation of gravitational force using the center of mass is only valid for spherically symmetric masses, suggesting that the gravitational field of a disc should be integrated over the length of the cylinder instead.
  • A further contribution discusses the gravitational forces from both ends of the cylinder, calculating the forces separately and indicating that the combined effect leads to an increase in the total gravitational force.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the gravitational force calculations, with no consensus reached on the correct approach or interpretation of the results.

Contextual Notes

Some calculations depend on assumptions about symmetry and the distribution of mass, which may not hold for the given scenario. The discussion highlights the complexity of integrating gravitational effects over non-spherical mass distributions.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in gravitational physics, particularly those exploring non-spherical mass distributions and their effects on gravitational force calculations.

nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,771
Reaction score
255
TL;DR
Given a cylinder with constant density, and a mass at one of its ends, it would seem via GmM/r^2) that the gravitational force between the cylinder and the mass would be less than that between the mass and the half of the cylinder closest to the mass, which is absurd, so what is wrong?
Given a cylinder of height 2k with constant density and total mass M, and another object (for simplicity, a point mass) with mass m on the top of the cylinder; the force of gravitation is calculated between the centers of mass, which for the cylinder is at a distance k from the point mass, giving a total force of GmM/k^2. Now however consider the force between the top half of the cylinder and the point mass. The center of gravity of the top half is now k/2 from the point mass, and the mass of the top half is M/2. So the force is now Gm(M/2)/(k/2)^2= 2GmM/k^2, or twice the force with the whole cylinder. That the whole gravitational force should be less than that from half of the cylinder seems to me wrong, but obviously I am some elementary piont. I would be grateful for someone to point out my mistake. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
nomadreid said:
the force of gravitation is calculated between the centers of mass,
This is only true for spherically symmetric masses. As a counter example consider the solar system. Its center of mass is somewhere inside the Sun, yet here we stand on the Earth.

If you can work out or find the gravitational field of a disc on axis, you can integrate over the length of the cylinder.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: nomadreid and Dale
The nearby mass is a point on axis at the end of the cylinder.
Consider the two ends of the cylinder are spheres, at centre of mass.
The near end is at r = k/2; with mass M/2.
The far end is at r = 3k/2; with mass M/2.
The force due to the near end is; F = Gm(M/2) / ( k² / 4 ) = 2GmM / k²
The force due to the far end is; F = Gm(M/2) / ( 9k² / 4 ) = 2GmM / 9k²
When you add the two ends you get an increase.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: nomadreid
Thanks, Ibix and Baluncore!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
11K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
2K