Gravitational Force of Bowling & Billiard Balls - Homework

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the gravitational force between a bowling ball and a billiard ball using the formula F = G(m1m2/r^2). There is confusion regarding whether to add the radii of both balls to determine the distance for the calculation. One participant initially used an incorrect radius sum, leading to discrepancies in their results. After revisiting the calculations, they corrected the denominator but still noted a difference in expected values. The conversation emphasizes the importance of accurate radius measurements and proper calculator usage for scientific calculations.
RKNY
Messages
13
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A bowling ball (mass = 7.2 kg, radius = 0.13 m) and a billiard ball (mass = 0.40 kg, radius = 0.028 m) may each be treated as uniform spheres. What is the magnitude of the maximum gravitational force that each can exert on the other?

Homework Equations


F = G(m1m2/r^2)

The Attempt at a Solution


Im confused about the radius portion of the problem. Shouldn't you add up the radius of both (0.028 + 0.13) and use that answer in the equation?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I would think that's as close as the two could come together and therefore the greatest force would be generated. You seem to imply that this is not the case?
 
denverdoc said:
I would think that's as close as the two could come together and therefore the greatest force would be generated. You seem to imply that this is not the case?

F = G x m1 x m2 / r^2

F = (6.67 x 10^-11) x (7.2) x (0.40) / (0.148) x 2

F = .000000001

Doesn't seem to be right when I go and check it.
 
Last edited:
you have .44 above when the problem states .4, and .148 instead of .158 as you suggested using in the denom. maybe follow suit and go to bed as I intend to now.
 
Last edited:
denverdoc said:
you have .44 above when the problem states .4, and .148 instead of .158 as you suggested using in the denom. maybe follow suit and go to bed as I intend to now.

sorry, I went back and changed everything. Now everything seems to be the way I attempted it.
 
well the denominator still shows 0.148, when its 0.158; also make sure to use exponential entry with your calculator; if it doesn't support such, then use the windows free calculator--use the more advanced of the two available. I get something like 7.7e-9
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top