Gauss' Law Conclusion in Gravitational Fields

AI Thread Summary
Electric and gravitational fields share similarities, with Gauss' Law applying to both. In electrostatics, a charged body with a cavity shows that no charge exists inside the conductor, while introducing a point charge in the cavity induces charge on the inner surface. In contrast, when a point mass is placed inside a spherical shell, there is no observable redistribution of mass on the shell's surface to counteract the gravitational field, as gravity does not behave like electrostatics in this regard. The electrostatic field within a conductor must be zero, a principle that does not have a direct parallel in gravitational fields. Overall, while Gauss' Law is applicable to both scenarios, the physical behaviors of electric and gravitational fields differ significantly.
modulus
Messages
127
Reaction score
3
I've been told that electric and gravitational fields have a lot in common, and both are practically analogous to each other. Also, the conclusions made through Gauss' Law apply just as well (analogously) to gravitational fields.



One of Gauss' Law's predictions is for a solid (conducting) charged body with a a cavity in it. According to it, no charge can exist inside the body...the only charge on it must exist on it's outer surface; that means no charge can exist on the inner surface. We get to that conclusion if we consider a Gaussian surface inside the body's material (not in the cavity).

But, if we introduce a point charge in the cavity, a charge develops on the inner surface, so that if we take a Gaussian surface in the body's material again (not in the cavity), there's no net electric field inside the body, and therefore, no net flux through the surface (and therefore, no net charge within the surface).


But, if we consider this for a gravitational field; we take a body with a cavity within it. For simplicity, I considered a spherical shell. I know that there's no gravitational field inside a shell. So, when I place a point mass inside the shell, why do we not observe any redistribution of the mass of the shell on the surface of the shell, so as to cancel out the gravitational field of the point mass (as we saw in the case of the point charge introduced in the cavity of the charged body). Or is there a tendency for a redistribution to take place...but it is not observable (or not possible, for that matter), because we consider the body to be rigid??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
modulus said:
One of Gauss' Law's predictions is for a solid (conducting) charged body with a a cavity in it. According to it, no charge can exist inside the body...the only charge on it must exist on it's outer surface; that means no charge can exist on the inner surface. We get to that conclusion if we consider a Gaussian surface inside the body's material (not in the cavity).
That's only true because the electrostatic field within a conductor must be zero. That goes beyond Gauss' law and has no parallel with gravity. (Gauss' law itself works just fine for both.)
 
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...
Back
Top