Gravitational Forces between two masses

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating gravitational forces between two masses, specifically involving a sphere with a carved-out section. The initial approach to find the force using the density and center of mass calculations is questioned due to the complexity introduced by the sphere's altered shape. Participants suggest using the concept of superposition, where the gravitational effect of the sphere with a hole is treated as the whole sphere minus the effect of the mass that was removed. The idea of negative mass density is debated, with some arguing it complicates the understanding of the problem. Ultimately, the consensus is to simplify the calculation by considering the gravitational effects separately rather than introducing negative densities.
SpectraPhy09
Messages
23
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
From a sphere of mass M and radius R, a smaller sphere of radius R/2 is carved out such that a cavity made in the original sphere is between its centre and periphery (Plz check the image I have attached). For this configuration in the figure where distance between the centre and the original sphere and the removed sphere is 3R, the gravitational force between the two sphere is?
Relevant Equations
F = GM1M2/r²
Density of the Sphere = 3M/4πR³
Mass of carved out sphere
= density × 4π/3 × R³/8
= M/8
The position of center of mass of The Sphere
Untitled3.png

{M(0) - M/8(R/2)}/M-M/8
-R/14

So total distance between centers of the two bodies is R/14 + 3R = 43R/14

So now I found force between the Mass 7M/8 (left out mass) and M/8
F = (G 7M/8 × M/8)/ (43R/14)²
F = 343GM²/2958R²
But this ans is given incorrect in my textbook
Is my approach wrong, or did I did something wrong?
Also is there any other method to solve this question?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20211116_174621.png
    IMG_20211116_174621.png
    7.8 KB · Views: 121
Physics news on Phys.org
The
SpectraPhy09 said:
The position of center of mass of The Sphere
The problem is that you no longer have a sphere.

Newton's universal law of gravitation (##F=\frac{Gm_1m_2}{r^2}##) works for point objects and for spherically symmetric objects. It does not work for oddly shaped objects such as spheres with holes carved out. [Newton's Shell Theorem is how you prove that spheres work]

There is a trick that you are expected to use here. Consider the original sphere with a smaller sphere of negative density super-imposed within it. This is the same thing as a hole, but is easier to calculate with.

Note that I have not checked your math for errors. Only your approach.
 
  • Like
Likes Steve4Physics and Delta2
jbriggs444 said:
Consider the original sphere with a smaller sphere of negative density super-imposed within it
But how can there be a negative Mass density?
This same approach is there in my textbook also But I didn't get it
 
SpectraPhy09 said:
But how can there be a negative Mass density?
This same approach is there in my textbook also But I didn't get it
The gravitational effect of a sphere with a hole is the same as the gravitational effect of the whole sphere minus the effect of the material that once filled the hole, do you agree?

If so, work the problem that way.

The math does not care whether you subtract positive mass or add negative mass.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Love
Likes PhDeezNutz, gmax137, SpectraPhy09 and 1 other person
Think superposition. If the sphere were solid and you calculated the force between it and the smaller sphere, that would be too much. You have to subtract something. See figure below.

Hollow sphere.png
 
Last edited:
SpectraPhy09 said:
But how can there be a negative Mass density?
This same approach is there in my textbook also But I didn't get it
I don't get it either! Instead:

Gravity of big sphere = Gravity of big sphere with little sphere missing + Gravity of little sphere

Hence:

Gravity of big sphere with little sphere missing = Gravity of big sphere - Gravity of little sphere

No need for negative mass density!
 
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 .
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Thread 'A bead-mass oscillatory system problem'
I can't figure out how to find the velocity of the particle at 37 degrees. Basically the bead moves with velocity towards right let's call it v1. The particle moves with some velocity v2. In frame of the bead, the particle is performing circular motion. So v of particle wrt bead would be perpendicular to the string. But how would I find the velocity of particle in ground frame? I tried using vectors to figure it out and the angle is coming out to be extremely long. One equation is by work...
Back
Top