Center of masses and proving gravity

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter sparry
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Center Gravity
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the advantages of using the center of mass (CM) in particle systems and Newton's theories regarding gravity. The CM frame simplifies calculations as the total momentum of particles is zero, making it easier to analyze angular momentum and kinetic energy. Newton postulated that the same gravitational force governs both the motion of planets and falling objects, extending this concept universally, although he did not provide definitive proof for celestial interactions. The conversation highlights the mathematical connections between centripetal force and Kepler's laws, emphasizing the foundational role of Newton's laws in understanding gravitational dynamics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of center of mass (CM) in physics
  • Familiarity with Newton's laws of motion
  • Basic knowledge of angular momentum and kinetic energy
  • Awareness of Kepler's laws of planetary motion
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the mathematical derivation of centripetal force from Newton's laws
  • Explore the implications of the center of mass in multi-particle systems
  • Investigate the historical context of Newton's gravitational theories
  • Learn about modern interpretations of gravity in celestial mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators, and anyone interested in the historical and mathematical foundations of gravitational theory and celestial mechanics.

sparry
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I am just curious to know what the advantages are to using center of mass for velocity are in a system of particles?

Also, how did Newton prove that the motion of the planets around the sun was the same as a projectile on Earth (I understand that this helped prove the force of gravity was responsible for both, but i don't understand how he proved them inherently the same)

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The sum of the momenta of all the particles is zero in the CM frame, which simplifies calculations in many cases. The total angular momentum or KE of a system of particles is equal to the angular momentum or KE of the total mass sitting at the CM plus the angular momentum or KE about the CM. All sorts of stuff like these make the CM frame very useful.

Newton (and a few others) hypothesized that it was the same force that moved the planets around the Sun that pulled apples down from trees. He didn’t prove it. He extended this property to all matter in the Universe. We can't quite make out the enormity and grandeur of the statement sitting here in the 21st century. Then he developed the mathematics for it, which other people couldn’t. A lot of things sort of made more sense after that using his law.
 
jr writes>
Newton defined centripetal force in terms of his second and third law by setting his first law object on a uniform circular path of motion, where the law of areas falls out as an efficient area enclosing artifact of the circle itself. He then connected the efficient time artifact of the circular motion to Kepler's efficient time controlled law of areas and generalized Kepler's law of areas to the entire universe as the mathematical carrier for his centripetal force. He assigned the resistance he worked against (inertial mass) and called gravity as the "a priori" cause of the centripetal force.

If we define gravity as the resistance we work against and quantify in terms of our inertial mass, or the inertial mass of other inertial mass objects that we as inertial mass objects interact with. an equal and opposite quantitative, but nonetheless subjective notion of force ensues. This is proved gravity. However it is not proved to act between celestial objects or between inertial mass objects and celestial objects.
Have a good time.
johnreed
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K