Derivation of the potential of a sphere

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the gravitational potential for a sphere using the virial theorem, specifically the expression 3/5 GM/r for a constant density sphere. The potential energy is calculated through the integration of gravitational forces from infinitesimally thin shells added from infinity. The energy expression is confirmed as E = -3/5 GM²/R, with detailed calculations provided for mass and energy. Participants clarify the derivation steps and correct minor errors in the initial formulation. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the integration process for gravitational potentials in spherical coordinates.
Jayse_83
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I've been told in a lecture course that the potential used in the virial theorem (for our application) is 3/5 GM/r. This describes the potential for a sphere of radius r, mass M created by bringing infinitly thin shells from infinity to form the next 'layer' of the sphere. I am having difficulty deriving this for myself, anybody wana give it a try ??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For a constant density sphere, that's:

E=-\frac{3}{5}\frac{GM^2}{R}

E=-\int_0^R \frac{GM_r}{r}dm

M_r=\frac{4}{3}\pi r^3\rho

dm=4\pi r^2\rho dr

E=-\frac{16\pi^2G\rho^2}{3}\int_0^R r^4dr=-\frac{16\pi^2G\rho^2}{15}R^5

M=\frac{4}{3}\pi R^3\rho

E=-\frac{3}{5}\frac{GM^2}{R}
 
Last edited:
Spacetiger: Where do the first two lines follow from?
 
whozum said:
Spacetiger: Where do the first two lines follow from?

The first one is just correcting the result. I'm pretty sure he had mis-typed it. The second is summing over the potentials of spherical shells at a radius r and with a width of dr (brought in from infinity and assuming the potential is zero at infinity).
 
Last edited:
yep i missed the squared out ... thanks for your help :)
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top