Gauss' Theorem for gravitational force

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Gauss' theorem as it applies to gravitational force, particularly focusing on the mathematical expressions and interpretations of the gravitational field and its divergence. Participants explore the implications of the theorem in different coordinate systems and the behavior of the gravitational field near point masses.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an equation involving the gravitational field and its divergence, suggesting that the divergence is zero.
  • Another participant questions the interpretation of the divergence, asserting that it should not be zero and providing an expression involving Dirac delta functions for point masses.
  • Some participants suggest using symmetry and spherical coordinates to simplify the analysis of the gravitational field.
  • Concerns are raised about the treatment of the variable r in the context of partial derivatives, with a participant indicating that the initial derivation may have overlooked the dependence on r.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of the divergence of the gravitational field, with one participant emphasizing that it should relate to mass density.
  • A later reply humorously points out the issue at the origin where x, y, and z equal zero, suggesting a potential singularity in the analysis.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the divergence of the gravitational field. Some assert it is zero, while others argue it is not, particularly in the context of point masses. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the correct interpretation of the mathematical expressions involved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential misunderstandings of vector calculus operations, particularly regarding the divergence of vector fields in the presence of point masses, and the implications of coordinate choice on the analysis.

coki2000
Messages
91
Reaction score
0
Hello,
I wonder that the gauss' theorem for gravitational force area.

[tex]\int\int_S \vec{g}\hat{n}dS=-4\pi GM=\int\int\int_V \vec{\nabla}\stackrel{\rightarrow}{g}dV[/tex]

[tex]\vec{g}=-G\frac{M}{r^2}\hat{r}\Rightarrow\hat{r}=\frac{\vec{r}}{r}\Rightarrow\vec{g}=-G\frac{M}{r^3}\vec{r}[/tex]

for [tex]\vec{r}=x\hat{x}+y\hat{y}+z\hat{z}[/tex] and [tex]r=\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2}[/tex]

[tex]\vec{\nabla}\vec{g}=-\frac{\partial}{\partial x}G\frac{M}{r^3}x-\frac{\partial }{\partial y}G\frac{M}{r^3}y-\frac{\partial }{\partial z}G\frac{M}{r^3}z=0[/tex]

The divergence of g has 0 so [tex]\int\int_S\vec{g}\hat{n}dS=0[/tex]

Where do I wrong please help me.Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Uh, I'm not sure I understand all of your equations there. By [tex]\vec{\nabla}\vec{g}[/tex], did you mean, [tex]\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{g}[/tex]?

If so, then you should know that [tex]\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{g}[/tex] is not zero. The correct expression is,

[tex]\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{g} = -4\pi G\sum_{i=0}^n m_i \delta^3(\vec{r} - \vec{r_i})[/tex]

When dealing witih point masses, the divergence of the gravitational field is a sum of Dirac delta functions. That way when you take the surface integral of the gravitational field, the volume integral that you have to take on the right hand side will give you [tex]4\pi G[/tex] times the sum of the point masses inside the surface of integration. This is actually a very common error, and Griffiths' E&M book discusses it in the first chapter on vector calculus.

Hope that helps!
 
Last edited:
coki2000 said:
Hello,
I wonder that the gauss' theorem for gravitational force area.

[tex]\int\int_S \vec{g}\hat{n}dS=-4\pi GM=\int\int\int_V \vec{\nabla}\stackrel{\rightarrow}{g}dV[/tex]

[tex]\vec{g}=-G\frac{M}{r^2}\hat{r}\Rightarrow\hat{r}=\frac{\vec{r}}{r}\Rightarrow\vec{g}=-G\frac{M}{r^3}\vec{r}[/tex]

for [tex]\vec{r}=x\hat{x}+y\hat{y}+z\hat{z}[/tex] and [tex]r=\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2}[/tex]

[tex]\vec{\nabla}\vec{g}=-\frac{\partial}{\partial x}G\frac{M}{r^3}x-\frac{\partial }{\partial y}G\frac{M}{r^3}y-\frac{\partial }{\partial z}G\frac{M}{r^3}z=0[/tex]

The divergence of g has 0 so [tex]\int\int_S\vec{g}\hat{n}dS=0[/tex]

Where do I wrong please help me.Thanks.

You seem to use
[tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial x} \frac{1}{r^3} = 0[/tex]
and similarly for the derivatives with respect to y and z. That's not the case!
 
you pointed out in your derivation what r was equal to but did not use it when you were taking the partial I think.
 
arunma said:
Uh, I'm not sure I understand all of your equations there. By [tex]\vec{\nabla}\vec{g}[/tex], did you mean, [tex]\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{g}[/tex]?

If so, then you should know that [tex]\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{g}[/tex] is not zero. The correct expression is,

[tex]\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{g} = -4\pi G\sum_{i=0}^n m_i \delta^3(\vec{r} - \vec{r_i})[/tex]

Hope that helps!
Yes,[tex]\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{g}[/tex] I mean. Thanks for your helps but I found that [tex]\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{g}[/tex] is zero.Let's I show it,

[tex]\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{g}=-GM(\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\frac{x}{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{3/2}}+\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\frac{y}{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{3/2}}+\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\frac{z}{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{3/2}})[/tex]

Now I calculate first partial derivative after generalize the other derivatives.

[tex]-GM\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\frac{x}{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{3/2}}=-GM\frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{3/2}-3x^2(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{1/2}}{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^3}[/tex]
Then
[tex]\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{g}=-GM(\frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{3/2}-3x^2(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{1/2}}{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^3}+\frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{3/2}-3y^2(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{1/2}}{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^3}+\frac{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{3/2}-3z^2(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{1/2}}{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^3})[/tex]

[tex]\vec{\nabla}\cdot\vec{g}=-GM(\frac{3(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{3/2}-3(x^2+y^2+z^2)(x^2+y^2+z^2)^{1/2}}{(x^2+y^2+z^2)^3})=0[/tex]

Where did I make wrong?I wonder it.Thanks.
 
What happens when x = y = z = 0? :wink:
 
Physically speaking, the divergence of g should depend upon mass density. There is a monopole source of gravity...mass!

Also, as a suggestion...work in spherical coordinates.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K