Dimensions of Newton's Law of Gravitation and Coloumb's Law

AI Thread Summary
Newton's Law of Gravitation and Coulomb's Law are compared in terms of their dimensional analysis, revealing that the gravitational constant G has dimensions of [M^{-1} L^3 T^{-2}]. In contrast, the assumption that the Coulomb constant κ (often denoted as Q) is dimensionless is challenged, as dimensional analysis indicates that κ actually has dimensions of [ML^3 T^{-2} Q^{-2}]. This suggests that κ cannot be dimensionless unless charge is expressed in non-rational units. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the dimensions of physical constants in both laws. Ultimately, the analysis highlights a potential misconception regarding the nature of charge in Coulomb's Law.
Pinu7
Messages
275
Reaction score
5
As we know, Newton's Law of Gravitation is
\[<br /> {\mathbf{F}} = \frac{{Gm_1 m_2 }}<br /> {{r^2 }}<br /> \]<br />
and Coulomb's law is

<br /> \[<br /> {\mathbf{F}} = \frac{{Qq_1 q_2 }}<br /> {{r^2 }}<br /> \]

We know from comparing the dimensions of the first equation that G, the gravitational constant, has the dimension
\[<br /> [M^{ - 1} L^3 T^{ - 2} ]<br /> \]<br />

But for Coulomb's law, we assume Q is dimensionless. Why do we make this assumption?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Where did you get the idea that Q (typically κ, not Q) is unitless?

Dimensional analysis tells you what the units for κ must be:

d(\kappa)=d(F)*d(r)^2/d(q)^2 = \frac{FL^2}{Q^2} = \frac{ML^3}{T^2Q^2}

where the d() extracts the dimensions of the quantity in question. This is not a dimensionless quantity. The only way it can be dimensionless is if charge is expressed in non-rational units, d(q) = \sqrt{ML^3}/T

See http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/CoulombsConstant.html
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...

Similar threads

Back
Top