Computing gravitational potential for a point inside the distribution

In summary: I've seen where they use contour integrals to integrate real integrands. They substitute a complex variable for the real variable and do a contour integral. But I've not seen them do this for integrands of more than one real variable, have you? If you don't feel like giving a detailed explanation, perhaps you'd give a few keywords I can look up. Thanks.
  • #1
Mike2
1,313
0
The gravitational potential, U, can be calculated at any point, [tex]\[
{\rm{\vec r}}
\][/tex], for a mass density distribution, [tex]\[
{\rm{\rho (r)}}
\][/tex], using the formula:

[tex]\[
{\rm{U = - }}\int_{{\rm{all space}}} {G\frac{{{\rm{\rho }}({\rm{\vec r')}}}}{{\left| {{\rm{ \vec r - \vec r' }}} \right|}}} \,\,\,d^3 {\rm{r'}}
\][/tex].

See:
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/GravitationalPotential.html

My question is how is this calculated for points inside the distribution. For points outside the distribution, [tex]\[
{\rm{\rho (r)}}
\][/tex] is zero, and there is no problem. But inside the distribution where [tex]\[
{\rm{\rho (r)}}
\][/tex] is not zero, there will be points where [tex]\[
{{\rm{\vec r - \vec r' }}}
\]
[/tex] does become zero and send the integrand to infinity. Wouldn't this cause a problem? And how would you work around it? Thanks.


Could it be as simple as adding a small constant in the denominator that goes to zero after the integration, such as:
[tex]\[
{\rm{U(\vec r) = }}\mathop {\lim }\limits_{\varepsilon \to 0} {\rm{( - }}\int_{{\rm{all space}}} {G\frac{{{\rm{\rho }}({\rm{\vec r')}}}}{{\left| {{\rm{ \vec r - \vec r' }}} \right| + \varepsilon }}} \,\,\,d^3 {\rm{r')}}
\][/tex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Er... no. One uses techniques such as residues to do such integration that contains poles.

Zz.
 
  • #3
ZapperZ said:
Er... no. One uses techniques such as residues to do such integration that contains poles.

Zz.
As I recall, residuals have to do with the math of complex numbers, which is a 2D construction resolved with line integrals, when here we have a 3D pole/infinity.

Are you referring to a Stoke's Theorm or a Divergence Theorm to turn integration throughout a volume which has an infinity into a surface integral that surrounds the infinity and so does not integrate through the infinity?
 
  • #4
Mike2 said:
As I recall, residuals have to do with the math of complex numbers, which is a 2D construction resolved with line integrals, when here we have a 3D pole/infinity.
Are you referring to a Stoke's Theorm or a Divergence Theorm to turn integration throughout a volume which has an infinity into a surface integral that surrounds the infinity and so does not integrate through the infinity?

Nah-ah. You only make use of the complex plane when you do the contour integrals. Look at your complex analysis text. You'll see many such integrals (real ones) being done using this technique. This integral is very common in E&M.

Zz.
 
  • #5
ZapperZ said:
Nah-ah. You only make use of the complex plane when you do the contour integrals. Look at your complex analysis text. You'll see many such integrals (real ones) being done using this technique. This integral is very common in E&M.
Zz.
I've seen where they use contour integrals to integrate real integrands. They substitute a complex variable for the real variable and do a contour integral. But I've not seen them do this for integrands of more than one real variable, have you? If you don't feel like giving a detailed explanation, perhaps you'd give a few keywords I can look up. Thanks.
 
Last edited:

1. What is the formula for computing gravitational potential for a point inside a distribution?

The formula for computing gravitational potential for a point inside a distribution is V = -G * M / r, where V is the gravitational potential, G is the gravitational constant, M is the mass of the distribution, and r is the distance from the point to the center of the distribution.

2. How does the distance from the point to the center of the distribution affect the gravitational potential?

The gravitational potential is inversely proportional to the distance from the point to the center of the distribution. This means that as the distance increases, the gravitational potential decreases.

3. Can the gravitational potential be negative for a point inside a distribution?

Yes, the gravitational potential can be negative for a point inside a distribution. This means that the point experiences a repulsive force from the distribution.

4. How does the mass of the distribution affect the gravitational potential at a point inside it?

The gravitational potential at a point inside a distribution is directly proportional to the mass of the distribution. This means that as the mass increases, the gravitational potential also increases.

5. Is the formula for computing gravitational potential the same for all types of distributions?

Yes, the formula for computing gravitational potential is the same for all types of distributions. However, the shape and density of the distribution may affect the calculation of the distance to the center of the distribution.

Similar threads

  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
392
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
19
Views
804
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
19
Views
912
Replies
4
Views
422
Replies
1
Views
893
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top