Moment of Inertia of a solid uniform sphere

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the calculation of the moment of inertia for a solid uniform sphere, where the user initially arrives at (3/5)Ma² instead of the expected (2/5)Ma². The user employs a differential volume element based on a thin spherical shell, which leads to confusion in the integration process. A suggestion is made to use the moment of inertia for a spherical shell instead of the formula for a solid disk, as the approach for disks does not directly apply to spheres. The key issue lies in the incorrect application of the moment of inertia formula for complex structures like spheres. Clarification on the correct method is needed to resolve the discrepancy in the calculations.
John Kingsley
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello, Calculating the moment of inertia of a solid uniform sphere about it's center I get (3/5) Ma2. I know I am supposed to be getting (2/5) Ma2. I am using a differential volume dm as 4*pi*rho*r*r*dr, where rho is density, and r is the distance from the center to the differential volume element, which is a thin sphere with surface area 4*pi*r*r. So in effect I am multiflying the surface area of a thin shere by a quantity dr to get my dV. I believe this is where the problem is arising, but in calculating the differential area element of a solid disk, this approach seemd to work just fine. So anyway, my integral r*r*dm becomes 4*pi*rho*the integral from 0 to a of (r^4)dr. a is the radius of the sphere. rho equals 3M/(4*pi*a^3), and I end up with (3/5)Ma^2. Where am I going wrong? The text uses dz instead of dr and uses the fact that I for a solid disk is (1/2)Ma^2, but I do not see why this way will not work also.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

Hello John! Welcome to PF! :smile:

(have a pi: π and try using the X2 icon just above the Reply box :wink:)
John Kingsley said:
… The text uses dz instead of dr and uses the fact that I for a solid disk is (1/2)Ma^2, but I do not see why this way will not work also.

your way will work if you use the moment of inertia for a spherical shell (about a diameter) instead of 1/2 Ma2 :wink:

(but you don't know what that is, do you? :redface:)
 
REMEMBER WHAT YOU DID IN CASE OF SOLID UNIFORM DISC?
WHAT YOU DID WAS INTEGRAL OF dI WHERE IT WAS M.I OF THIN RING.
HERE WE DON'T KNOW THE dI, i.e. MOMENT OF INERTIA OF SMALL SPHERE(THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE TO FIND).MOREOVER THE SIMPLE I=MR2 WON'T DO HERE FOR A COMPLEX STRUCTURE LIKE SPHERE.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top