B Gravitational difference between a black hole and a star

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the difference in gravitational strength between a stellar-mass black hole and a stellar-mass star, emphasizing that gravity is stronger at the surface of a smaller, denser object. The formula F=Gm/r^2 illustrates that for two objects with the same mass, the one with a smaller radius exerts a stronger gravitational force at its surface. This means that a black hole, being much denser, has a gravitational field strong enough to trap light, unlike a star like the sun. The conversation highlights the importance of precise mathematical language in understanding these concepts. Ultimately, the gravitational field's strength is influenced by the object's density and size.
Tatest
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
How come the gravity of a stellar- mass black hole is strong enough to trap light but the gravity of a stellar-mass star (eg the sun) is not strong enough to trap light ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This question is easier to think about if you start with ordinary classical Newtonian gravity: ##F=Gm/r^2## is the formula for the strength of the gravitational field at a distance ##r## from the center of a spherical object (like a star) with mass ##m##. So if we have two objects with the same mass, but one of them is much denser (so is much smaller) than the other, what does that tell us about the strength of the gravitational force at the surface?
 
Thankyou Nugatory. I think that your marvellous formula tells me that the strength of the gravitational force is greater at the surface of the smaller object compared to a larger object with the same mass.

Doesn't that mean that the smaller object has stronger gravity ?
 
Tatest said:
Doesn't that mean that the smaller object has stronger gravity ?
It means that the gravitational field is stronger at the surface of the smaller object, because the surface is closer to the center.

You can attach the words "the smaller object has stronger gravity" to this fact if you want, but not everyone is going to understand those words the same way. The math is precise and unambiguous, and that's part of why mathematics is the language of physics.
 
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
7K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Back
Top