Graviational Field of Floating Mountain

  • Thread starter Thread starter chrisk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field Floating
chrisk
Messages
287
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Consider a spherical mountain of radius a, mass M, floating in equililbrium in the earth, and whose density is half that of the earth. Assume that a is much less than the Earth's radius, so that the Earth's surface can be regarded as flat in the neighborhood of the mountain. If the mountain were not present, the graviational field intensity near the Earth's's surface would be g0. Find the difference between g0 and the actual value of g at the the top of the mountain.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



Knowledge of Lagrangian Mechanics is not required. I determined the mountain is half submerged below the Earth's surface and g0 is independent of height (infinite disk). I attempted solving for the g field of a hemisphere but the intergral was not a form that could be solved without binomial expansion. The answer provided in the back of the text is

g0 - g = (GM/a^2)(2 - sqrt(2))

I noted the answer is equivalent to a thin disk of radius a, mass M, with surface density equal to the Earth's volume density at a distance a from the center of the disk along the disk axis. So, somehow superposition shows the equivalence. Any hints are appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I solved the problem. A matter of superposition of fields at the point in question. Key was finding the field due to a solid hemisphere a distance a from the flat surface of the hemisphere.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top