Calculating Gravitational Force Between a Doctor and a Baby

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rasine
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the gravitational force between a doctor and a baby using the formula F=G(m1m2)/r^2. A participant initially miscalculated the force by using an incorrect distance of 0.5 meters instead of the correct 1 meter. Clarification was provided that the radius in the formula should represent the distance between the centers of the two masses. The conversation highlights the importance of using accurate measurements in gravitational calculations. Ultimately, the focus remains on the gravitational influence of the doctor compared to planetary effects at birth.
Rasine
Messages
208
Reaction score
0
Some believe that the positions of the planets at the time of birth influence the newborn. Others deride this and say that the gravitational force exerted on a baby by the obstetrician is greater than that exerted by the planets. To check this claim, first calculate the gravitational force exerted on a 5.7 kg baby by a 87.9 kg doctor who is 1.0 m away.


ok so i am going to use the formula F=G(m1m2)/r^2 and that would be

F=6.67x10^-11(87.9*5.7)/.5^2 which yeilds 1.32 x10^-7 N which is not the right answer

what am i doing wrong
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have 0.5 for your distance. It should be the 1 m. It is the total distance between the objects you need here.
 
time to call in a replacement--seriously if the center of gravity between the doc and the mom is a meter, those are long forceps. just a joking aside.
 
the equation calls for the radius squared and so i was using .5^2
 
Rasine said:
the equation calls for the radius squared and so i was using .5^2
I think the radius is the distance between the two objects centers. This is different than how we usu think of circles and distance.
 
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...
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Back
Top