Calculating Gravitational Energy

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around an equation derived from multiplying angular acceleration by the surface area of a sphere, which the author claims represents energy. However, it is clarified that while the dimensions may align with energy, the equation does not inherently describe gravitational energy. Instead, it relates to the work done in accelerating a thin spherical shell. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the context and physical meaning behind equations, as dimensional analysis alone does not confirm their applicability. Ultimately, the equation may represent work rather than gravitational energy.
Bravodhan
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
When I multiplied angular accelaration with surface area of sphere .I got an equation for energy.

What do this equation mean by?
Is this equation describe gravitational energy?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Can you post the equations you used and the problem they were used in?
 
But dimensionally this equation is correct.
 
Angular accelaration*surface area of a sphere = Energy
Angular velocity/time*4(pi)r2=Energy

Dimensional formula:-
M0 L0 T-2 * M L2 T0 = M L2 T-2

M L2 T-2 = Energy

I take this energy equation in terms of planetry motion .
 
Last edited:
The fact that something has dimensions of energy doesn't make it an energy. Torque, for example.
 
First, if its truly surface area, you get M0 not M. The whole equation is massless.
The way you have written it, it is the mass of a thin spherical shell times the angular acceleration.

Second, Work also has the dimensions of Energy. I think your equation gives you the amount of work expended to accelerate (spin up or spin down) the thin spherical shell by that much.

Jim Graber
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
Back
Top