Gravitation: Sphere is same as point mass?

AI Thread Summary
Newton's law of universal gravitation applies to point masses, but the discussion explores whether a spherical mass behaves the same way as a point mass at its center. The user seeks proof of equivalence between the gravitational effects experienced on the surface of a sphere and those from a point mass located at the center. They express difficulty in deriving the necessary integral to demonstrate this relationship and reference the shell theorem for clarification. Other participants confirm that a spherical mass distribution indeed behaves like a point mass outside the sphere, citing symmetry and Gauss's Theorem to support their claims. The user invites feedback on their calculations, indicating a desire for validation of their findings.
gamesguru
Messages
84
Reaction score
2
Newton's law of universal gravitation is only valid for point masses. Is it just chance that a person on the Earth experiences the same force of gravity that he would if he were on a shell of no mass and the same radius of Earth with a single point at the shell's center which had the mass of the earth?

Does anyone know of a proof that these two situations are equivalent? I've been trying to do it using spherical coordinates and I get stumped at,
g=2G \pi \delta \int _0^{\pi }\int _0^r\frac{\rho ^2\sin\phi \text{cos}\left\frac{\phi }{2}\right}{r^2+\rho ^2-2\rho r \text{cos}\phi }d\rho d\phi.
Where \delta is the average density and r is the radius.

If anyone is interested in how I got to this, I'd be happy to explain it. If the two listed situations are identical, then the double integral should be \frac{2}{3}.

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Feldoh said:
In that picture it is claimed that the distance between the test mass and every point on the shaded band dM is s. Either I'm not getting something, or that distance is different at every point along the band.
 
Your integral looks a bit strange. I'm not saying its wrong.

If you do it right you will get the result that anybody with a spherical mass distribution behaves gravitationally exactly like a point mass for any point outside the body. Newton proved this using the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_theorem" .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D H said:
Your integral looks a bit strange. I'm not saying its wrong.

If you do it right you will get the result that anybody with a spherical mass distribution behaves gravitationally exactly like a point mass for any point outside the body. Newton proved this using the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_theorem" .

2nd what D H says. if you are outside the sphere and consider the gravitational field vector (as a function of position relative to the center of the sphere), there is no reason (because of symmetry) to think that the direction of the field vector would be different in the two cases. so the direction of the field is the same. and Gauss's Theorem takes care of the magnitude between the two cases (again, for outside the sphere).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I uploaded the word document with all my work on it http://www.mediafire.com/?3nm93snmxgd" , look at that to see how I got to that integral. Btw, when I plug it into mathematica it gives me,
g=\frac{4}{15}G\delta\pi r(1+4\log4).

If someone could look through my paper to see what I did wrong, that'd be great. I hate when I do something I feel is valid but get a different answer than the accepted answer. It's only 2 pages and most of the first isn't necessary to read. Thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...

Similar threads

Back
Top