Gravitational potential energy problem

AI Thread Summary
The gravitational potential energy of a self-gravitating sphere, such as the Sun, is approximately -GM^2/R. The timescale for gravitational contraction to supply the Sun's current luminosity can be calculated using the formula t = -(1/2)(W_sun)/(L_sun). The virial theorem indicates that for self-gravitating bodies in equilibrium, the relationship T = -(1/2)V holds, allowing for energy calculations as the star contracts. This method was historically significant before the understanding of nuclear fusion processes. Understanding these principles provides insight into stellar evolution and energy generation.
Tuugii
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
The gravitational potential energy W of a self-gravitating sphere of mass M and radius R depends on the detailed distribution of mass within the sphere, but it is generally of order of magnitude -GM^2/R. For the Sun, W_sun = -2G(M_sun)^2/R. What is the timescale
t = -(1/2)(W_sun)/(L_sun) over which gravitational contraction could have supplied the power radiated by the sun at it's present rate?

please give some hints, thanks a lot.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am giving some answer because I think the question belongs to the Advanced Physics section.

There is something called a “virial theorem” which holds good for self gravitating bodies and many other systems. If the system is roughly in equilibrium, so that the time averages of kinetic and potential energies are changing slowly, the virial theorem implies that T = -(1/2)V. As the star shrinks, the energy is radiated away so that the above relation is valid. So, knowing the present luminosity of the sun, we can roughly find how long it can radiate at the present rate using this mechanism.

In fact, this was the theory proposed before nuclear reactions were known about.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top