Drawing Radial Field Equipotentials and Field Lines

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the characteristics of radial fields, specifically the relationship between field lines and equipotential surfaces. It establishes that in a radial field, field lines are evenly spaced but become increasingly distant from the center, indicating a reduction in gravitational field strength. Equipotential surfaces, on the other hand, are unevenly spaced, reflecting equal potential differences. The conversation also explores alternative units for gravitational field strength, suggesting that while Jm-1kg-1 could be used, m/s2 remains the conventional choice.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of gravitational fields and their properties.
  • Familiarity with equipotential surfaces and lines.
  • Knowledge of the equation for gravitational potential energy, V(r) = -GM/r.
  • Basic grasp of iterative plotting procedures in physics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the concept of gravitational field strength and its units.
  • Learn about equipotential surfaces and their significance in physics.
  • Explore iterative methods for plotting gravitational fields and equipotential lines.
  • Investigate the implications of using alternative units for gravitational measurements.
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in physics, particularly those studying gravitational fields and equipotential surfaces, as well as researchers interested in alternative units of measurement in gravitational contexts.

AN630078
Messages
242
Reaction score
25
Homework Statement
Hello, I have a question asking me to draw a radial gravitational field showing the gravitational field lines and the equipotential surfaces for equal energy increments. I then have to comment upon the spacing of the field lines and equipotential lines.

My query is in this question would it be referring to the spacing visually when drawing the field lines and equipotentials or what this spacing represents in a radial field?

I am not sure how to comprehensively answer what is being asked and would be very grateful for any advice 😁
Relevant Equations
g=GM/r^2
I have just attached a standard depiction of a radial field as one may similarly choose to draw it. So I understand that the gravitational field strength in a field is defined as the force per unit mass at that point. The field lines in a radial field move further apart further away from the centre indicating the field strength is reducing. The closer together the field lines the stronger the field and thus the force.
The equipotential surfaces of a radial field are positions within a field with zero difference in potential between them; ie. the potential on an equipotential surface is the same everywhere as connected by equipotential lines. The field will always be perpendicular to the equipotential lines; since a field is defined as a region in which potential changes. How close the equipotentials are indicates the strength of the electric field and how quickly the potential is changing. e.g. a stronger field has closer equipotentials.

In a radial field, the field lines are all equally separated in terms of field strength but the radial distance between them increases as you move further from the planet. If this question is just asking how to draw a general radial field with field and equipotential lines then one would say that the field lines are evenly spaced but increase in distance further from the centre? And moreover, would the equipotential surfaces be said visually to be drawn unequally spaced with successive shells representing equal intervals of potential difference.

So for a radial field the field lines are evenly spaced but the equipotential surfaces are unevenly spaced?

Moreover, could an alternative unit for gravitational field strength besides N kg^-1 be Jm^-1kg^-1?
 

Attachments

  • Radial Field.png
    Radial Field.png
    22.4 KB · Views: 234
Physics news on Phys.org
You want equal energy increments so you have to start with the equation for the potential energy per unit mass, ##V(r)## not force per unit mass ##g(r)##.
If ##V(r)=-\dfrac{GM}{r}##, then $$\Delta V = GM\frac{\Delta r}{r^2}~\Rightarrow ~\frac{\Delta V}{V}=-\frac{\Delta r}{r}.$$Can you devise an iterative plotting procedure that exploits the above condition?

You can devise any alternative unit for gravitational field strength that you want, but m/s2 is more conventional and most easily recognizable by everyone.
 
Last edited:
kuruman said:
You want equal energy increments so you have to start with the equation for the potential energy per unit mass, ##V(r)## not force per unit mass ##g(r)##.
If ##V(r)=-\dfrac{GM}{r}##, then $$\Delta V = GM\frac{\Delta r}{r^2}~\Rightarrow ~\frac{\Delta V}{V}=-\frac{\Delta r}{r}.$$Can you devise an iterative plotting procedure that exploits the above condition?

You can devise any alternative unit for gravitational field strength that you want, but m/s2 is more conventional and most easily recognizable by everyone.
Thank you for your reply. I do not know what you mean by an iterative plotting procedure.
In regard to an alternative unit for gravitational field strength, yes thank you for your suggestion I am aware of the use of m/s^2? However, would Jm^-1kg^-1 be a suitable alternative, although lesser used?
 
AN630078 said:
Thank you for your reply. I do not know what you mean by an iterative plotting procedure.
In regard to an alternative unit for gravitational field strength, yes thank you for your suggestion I am aware of the use of m/s^2? However, would Jm^-1kg^-1 be a suitable alternative, although lesser used?
Iterative procedure:
Decide on a value for the constant increment ##\Delta V##.
Find a number for the potential ##V## at ##r = R_E## (the Earth's radius) and draw an equipotential at that ##r##. Label it with the value of ##V.##
1. Solve the equation ##\dfrac{\Delta V}{V}=-\dfrac{\Delta r}{r}## to get the magnitude of the radius increment ##\Delta r## and add it to the old ##r##. Ignore the negative sign.
2. Add the increment ##\Delta V## to the old potential to get the new ##V## and draw an equipotential at the new ##r.## Label it with the new value of ##V.##
3. Go back to step 1 and repeat.
AN630078 said:
However, would Jm^-1kg^-1 be a suitable alternative, although lesser used?
In my opinion no, for the same reason that one uses Joules and not kg⋅m2/s2.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
10K
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K