Gravitation problem -- Binary star system

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the gravitational dynamics of a binary star system, specifically addressing the concepts of moments and centripetal forces. Participants clarify that the equation M1R1 = M2R2 represents the balance of moments about the center of mass, which is a fixed point in the system. The centripetal force acting on each star is equal to the gravitational force between them, ensuring circular orbits. Understanding these principles is crucial for analyzing the motion of celestial bodies in binary systems.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Newtonian gravity and its implications for celestial bodies.
  • Familiarity with the concept of center of mass in a two-body system.
  • Knowledge of centripetal force and its relationship to gravitational force.
  • Basic algebra skills for manipulating equations related to motion and forces.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the center of mass formula for two-point masses.
  • Learn about the relationship between gravitational force and centripetal acceleration in binary systems.
  • Explore the concept of moment of inertia and its applications in rotational dynamics.
  • Investigate the effects of varying mass and radius on gravitational interactions in celestial mechanics.
USEFUL FOR

Astronomy students, astrophysicists, and anyone interested in understanding the mechanics of binary star systems and gravitational interactions.

  • #31
Angie Tom said:
I don't still quite understand how the centripetal forces are equal? Aren't the radii and the masses different?
In this system the centripetal forces are provided by gravity. No other forces are acting. Can the force due to gravity acting on the two bodies be different?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Yes, if the masses and radii are different
 
  • #33
gneill said:
In this system the centripetal forces are provided by gravity. No other forces are acting. Can the force due to gravity acting on the two bodies be different?
yes, if the masses and radii are different
 
  • #34
Angie Tom said:
yes, if the masses and radii are different
No. Review Newtonian gravity. There is only one distance that matters, and that is the separation between the centers of the two spherical bodies.
 
  • #35
gneill said:
No. Review Newtonian gravity. There is only one distance that matters, and that is the separation between the centers of the two spherical bodies.
I know the law! attractive force between any 2 point masses is directly proportional to the product of the masses and inversely proportional to the distance squared between them right?
Can u please clarify what exactly is point c
 
  • #36
Point C is the center of mass of the system. It's the fixed point around which both bodies orbit.

Fig1.png
 
  • #37
I meant Is there a body at point C? star...planet?
 
  • #38
gneill said:
Point C is the center of mass of the system. It's the fixed point around which both bodies orbit.

View attachment 92177
I meant is there a body at point c?
 
  • #39
Angie Tom said:
I meant is there a body at point c?
No, it's empty space.

The center of mass of two spherical masses lies along the line joining them, but there's no object associated with that center of mass: it's a mathematical point.
 
  • #40
Okay
gneill said:
No, it's empty space.

The center of mass of two spherical masses lies along the line joining them, but there's no object associated with that center of mass: it's a mathematical point.
Okay, so this means that the gravitational force is between the 2 masses and the centripetal force is directed from each mass to c right?
 
  • #41
Angie Tom said:
Okay

Okay, so this means that the gravitational force is between the 2 masses and the centripetal force is directed from each mass to c right?
Correct.
 
  • #42
gneill said:
Correct.
THANKS A MILLON
 
  • #43
Why does the normal on a mass have different values at the pole and at the equator?
 
  • #44
Angie Tom said:
Why does the normal on a mass have different values at the pole and at the equator?
This looks like a new question. Start a new thread for it, and use the template that will be provided in the edit window after hitting the "Post New Thread" icon.
 
  • #45
Angie Tom said:
Okay

Okay, so this means that the gravitational force is between the 2 masses and the centripetal force is directed from each mass to c right?
I wouldn't word it that way. The mass centres and c are in a straight line, so a direction 'towards c' is the same as 'towards the other star's centre'. Besides, it is important to remember that centripetal force is a resultant force. Your wording might give the false impression that each star is somehow attracted to the common mass centre.

If two stars are on parallel and opposite courses, at right angles to the line joining them at some instant, each experiences attraction towards the other star so accelerates in that direction. Since that is at right angles to their directions of motion, that results in a change of direction, not a change in speed. That is, it will lead them to start to revolve around some points (not necessarily the same point) on the line joining them.
This situation may be transient; a moment later their arrangement no longer matches those conditions.

If the distance between them, their speeds and their masses are in the right relationship to each other, that point will be, for both, the common mass centre. If so, the arrangement is dynamically stable, i.e. they will continue to satisfy all thes conditions and continue to orbit around that common mass centre. But the attaction is always to the mass centre of the other star.

One more point, just to be clear. That each star is attracted to the mass centre of the other is a special feature of spherically symmetric bodies. In reality, each atom of each star is attracted to each atom of the other. But if each star is made of concentric spherical shells, each of uniform mass density, it turns out that the net attraction of each atom of one star is towards the mass centre of the other. The situation would be far more complex with two amorphous lumps of rock orbiting each other.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Bandersnatch
  • #46
haruspex said:
I wouldn't word it that way. The mass centres and c are in a straight line, so a direction 'towards c' is the same as 'towards the other star's centre'. Besides, it is important to remember that centripetal force is a resultant force. Your wording might give the false impression that each star is somehow attracted to the common mass centre.

If two stars are on parallel and opposite courses, at right angles to the line joining them at some instant, each experiences attraction towards the other star so accelerates in that direction. Since that is at right angles to their directions of motion, that results in a change of direction, not a change in speed. That is, it will lead them to start to revolve around some points (not necessarily the same point) on the line joining them.
This situation may be transient; a moment later their arrangement no longer matches those conditions.

If the distance between them, their speeds and their masses are in the right relationship to each other, that point will be, for both, the common mass centre. If so, the arrangement is dynamically stable, i.e. they will continue to satisfy all thes conditions and continue to orbit around that common mass centre. But the attaction is always to the mass centre of the other star.

One more point, just to be clear. That each star is attracted to the mass centre of the other is a special feature of spherically symmetric bodies. In reality, each atom of each star is attracted to each atom of the other. But if each star is made of concentric spherical shells, each of uniform mass density, it turns out that the net attraction of each atom of one star is towards the mass centre of the other. The situation would be far more complex with two amorphous lumps of rock orbiting each other.
This is really helpful! Thanks a lot :D
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K