Gravitation of non-uniform density

Mindscrape
Messages
1,854
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


A gaseous planet, with radius R, has a radially dependent density function
\rho (r') = \rho_0 [\frac{r'}{R}]^2
where r' is the distance from the center planet. Find the magnitude of force for a mass m inside and outside of the planet.


Homework Equations


F = -\frac{GmM}{r^2}
F = -G m \int_V \frac{\rho(r') \hat{e_r}}{r^2}dv'


The Attempt at a Solution


I'm pretty sure I did it right, but would like some confirmation. The mass inside the planet, taking a sample shell, would be

M = \int_0^r 4\pi r'^2 dr' \rho(r')

which would give

M = \int_0^r 4\pi r'^2 dr' \rho_0 (\frac{r'}{R})^2

and evaluates to

M = \frac{4}{5} \pi r^5 \frac{\rho_0}{R^2}

such that the force inside will be

F = \frac{-Gm r^3}{r^2}\rho_0 \hat{e_r}

Outside

the same idea applies

M = \int_0^R 4 \pi r'^2 dr' \rho(r')

and gives

M = \frac{4}{5} \pi R^5 \frac{\rho_0}{R^2}

so that the force is

F = \frac{-GmR^2}{r^2}\rho_0 \hat{e_r}

Both answers, more or less, make sense. Inside, as you move further away that the force will increase. Outside, the force will decrease as you move further away.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It's the same problem as a Gauss' law problem for a ball of non-uniform charge, and that's how the solution goes, so that all looks right.
 
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