Gravitation law equation as R approaches zero

AI Thread Summary
As the radius (R) approaches zero in the gravitational force equation F = GMm/R^2, the force becomes undefined, particularly for point particles, as they cannot perfectly overlap. For larger bodies like planets, modifications are necessary; according to Gauss's law, only the mass within the radius of interest affects the gravitational force. As one moves toward the center of a planet, the enclosed mass decreases, causing the gravitational force to approach zero. Discussions also highlight that while theoretical scenarios can lead to infinite gravity, practical physics maintains a finite radius in unified theories. Understanding these concepts is essential for grasping gravitational interactions in different contexts.
pconstantino
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
Hello,

in the equation which describes the force as a function of the radius:

F = GMm/R^2


What happens as R approaches zero? or even when R is less than the radius of the planet.

mass m will be inside the planet so this formula seems to break down because m will be pulled from both sides.

how can this be handled?

thank you !
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That's an excellent question. For a detailed answer, try looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauss's_law_for_gravity and the references it cites.

If you have two massive point particles (infinitesimally small) which are gravitationally interacting with each-other, the force becomes undefined as the separation approaches zero. This is a non-physical scenario however, as two particles can never perfectly overlap.

If you're talking about a planet (or other large body) you're exactly right---the equation has to be modified. What "Gauss' law" (the link I posted) states, is that only the mass within the radius you're interested in, matters. (This is an oversimplification, but its the basic idea). If you are half way to the center of the earth, you'll only need to consider the mass within a sphere of radius = half the Earth's radius (approximately 1/8 the mass of the earth). Thus, as your distance from the center approaches zero, the mass enclosed approaches zero, and the force goes to zero.

Does this make sense?
We can go into more math/details if you're interested.
 
Two objects cannot match exactly. The distance is calculated between point of gravity of both objects. So in 3d 2 objects cannot overlap exactly on their point of gravity. Then why thinking about it?
 
pconstantino said:
Hello,

in the equation which describes the force as a function of the radius:

F = GMm/R^2


What happens as R approaches zero? or even when R is less than the radius of the planet.

Of course there at objects which are VERY massive and their radius is in fact considered to be 0. What happens then is that gravity gets larger and larger as you approach them, until it goes to infinity.
 
Raama said:
Two objects cannot match exactly. The distance is calculated between point of gravity of both objects. So in 3d 2 objects cannot overlap exactly on their point of gravity. Then why thinking about it?
Because non-physical questions are still often good ones both per se and for elucidating physical ones. Additionally, as 'objects' are actually waves, they can overlap largely.


Lsos said:
Of course there at objects which are VERY massive and their radius is in fact considered to be 0. What happens then is that gravity gets larger and larger as you approach them, until it goes to infinity.
That's not accurate. In pure gravity theories one would simply say the gravitational force becomes undefined. Otherwise, most unifying theories always preserve a finite radius (e.g. string theory).
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top