Can Newton's Gravitational Law and Hooke's Law be Unified?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Orion1
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the potential unification of Newton's Gravitational Law and Hooke's Law, exploring whether they can be reconciled mathematically and conceptually. Participants examine the implications of their equations and the conditions under which they might apply, with a focus on theoretical and conceptual aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose a mathematical relationship between Hooke's Law and Newton's Law, suggesting that they can be expressed in similar forms under certain conditions.
  • One participant questions the meaning of "rebound" in the context of gravitational interactions between stars and seeks clarification on the mechanisms involved.
  • Another participant discusses energy conservation in the context of gravitational and elastic systems, presenting equations that equate gravitational potential energy with elastic potential energy.
  • Some argue that Hooke's Law, which describes elastic behavior, fundamentally differs from gravitational force, which decreases with distance, leading to a disagreement on the applicability of Hooke's Law to gravitational systems.
  • A participant challenges the validity of the proposed equations, stating that gravitational force behaves differently than elastic force and questioning the assumptions made about constants like G and k.
  • Questions arise regarding the nature of non-relativistic gravitational systems and the conditions under which Newtonian mechanics applies, with some participants defining non-relativistic systems as those where velocities are much less than the speed of light.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the compatibility of Newton's and Hooke's laws, with no consensus reached. Some support the idea of a mathematical unification, while others argue against it based on fundamental differences in the nature of the forces involved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include unresolved assumptions about the conditions under which the proposed equations hold, as well as the dependence on definitions of constants like G and k. The discussion also highlights the complexities of applying classical mechanics in relativistic contexts.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying classical mechanics, gravitational theory, or the mathematical relationships between different physical laws, particularly in the context of theoretical physics.

Orion1
Messages
961
Reaction score
3


Hooke's Law:
F_h (x) = -kx
k - spring force constant

Newtons Law: (Gravitation)
F_g (r) = -G \frac{M^2}{r^2}

F_g (r) = F_h (r)

Newton-Hooke equation:
-G \frac{M^2}{r^2} = -kr

k = G \frac{M^2}{r^3}

G = k \frac{r^3}{M^2}

Does Newtons Law obey Hooke's Law?

[/color]
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
"i.e. Do two stars of equal mass eventually rebound after being pulled apart?"

Explain what you mean by "rebound", and by what mechanism do you mean "pulled apart"?
 
Originally posted by Labguy
"i.e. Do two stars of equal mass eventually rebound after being pulled apart?"

Explain what you mean by "rebound", and by what mechanism do you mean "pulled apart"?
Please...
 
Energy...



U_g = U_h

- G \frac{M^2}{r} = - k \frac{r^2}{2}

k = G \frac{2 M^2}{r^3}

G = k \frac{r^3}{2 M^2}

E = K + U

E_g = E_h

Newton-Hooke Energy Theorem:
E_g = \frac{Mv^2}{2} - G \frac{M^2}{r} = \frac{Mv^2}{2} - k \frac{r^2}{2}

E_g = m \left( \frac{v^2}{2} - G \frac{M}{r} \right) = \frac{1}{2} \left( mv^2 - kr^2 \right)

E_g = m \left( 2 \left( \frac{ \pi r}{T} \right)^2 - G \frac{M}{r} \right) = \frac{r^2}{2} \left( m \left( \frac{2 \pi}{T} \right)^2 - k \right)

E_h = \frac{r^2}{2} \left( m \left( \frac{2 \pi}{T} \right)^2 - k \right)

k = 2 \left( 2m \left( \frac{ \pi}{T} \right)^2 - \frac{E_h}{r^2} \right)

Does Newtons Law obey Hooke's Law?

Are the above theorems true for all non-relativistic gravitational systems?

What is the value for Hooke's Constant (k)?

 
Last edited:
Ok, thanks. I just didn't understand the previous point since it was all formulae with no verbiage.
 
The answer would be no. As can be seen from the equations, Hooke's law, which applies to elastic stretching and squeezing, increases in force with extension, whilst gravitational force does the opposite. Thus, while an object in a gravitational field has an escape velocity, you can't escape a spring.

G = k \frac{r^3}{M^2}
This, as you can see, is nonsense, as G is a constant whilst M and r vary from situation to situation.

Your equation only represents a system where a gravitationally attracted body is kept from falling in by a gigantic spring of natural length 2r.
 
Welcome after to me. What are non-relativistic gravitatioanl systems

[?]
 
Hooke's Law...


is nonsense, as G is a constant whilst M and r vary from situation to situation.

increases in force with extension
[/color]

G = k \frac{r^3}{M^2}
What are the Standard International units for G as described by this formula as opposed to Newton's G SI units?

Newton's G Law increases in force with contraction.

Does Hooke's Law increase in force with contraction, or decrease?

Why is it presumed that Hooke's Constant (k) is a universal constant described by this formula as opposed to a static constant applied to a given system?

What are the values of Hooke's Constant(k) for a Mercury-Sol system as opposed to a Jupiter-Sol system?


Q: What are non-relativistic gravitatioanl systems?
[/color]

A non-relativistic gravitational system is a gravity dominated system in which the mass velocities involved are only a small fraction of luminous velocity.

v_m \ll c

All Newtonian Theorems fail at relativistic velocities.

 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
859
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K