Integrating Shell Collapse Velocity Equation for Free-Fall Time Calculation

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheTourist
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hard Intergration
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on deriving the free-fall time of a collapsing star using the shell collapse velocity equation. The equation provided is \(\frac{dr}{dt}=-[GM(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{R})]^{1/2}\), and the user seeks to integrate it by substituting \(x=r/R\) to utilize a standard integral. There is confusion regarding the right-hand side of the equation, with concerns that it may not be correctly expressed as a function of \(r\). The conversation highlights the challenges in manipulating the equation for integration. Overall, the focus is on finding the correct approach to solve the integral for free-fall time.
TheTourist
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
I have derived the following equation for the velocity of a collapsing shell of a collapsing star.
\frac{dr}{dt}=-[GM(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{R})]1/2

I now need to integrate this to find the free-fall time, and the hint is to manipulate the equation into a form where you can use a standard integral: substitute x=r/R and then use the standard integral \int[\frac{x}{1-x}]1/2 dx=\pi/2

I am completely stuck on how to do this
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi TheTourist! :smile:

(have an integral: ∫ and a square-root: √ and a pi: π :wink:)

hmm … that RHS can't possibly be correct :redface:

shouldn't it be a function of r? :smile:
 
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...
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 '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