Proving the gravitational force of a solid sphere using integration

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the gravitational force of a solid sphere using integration techniques. Participants are exploring the implications of assuming point mass behavior for mass elements within a uniformly distributed mass, particularly in the context of gravitational interactions.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the validity of assuming that the gravitational force from a mass element can be treated as if it were concentrated at the center of mass. There are discussions about the implications of uniform mass distribution and the effects of distance on gravitational pull.

Discussion Status

The discussion is actively exploring different interpretations of gravitational force calculations. Some participants are providing insights into the limitations of approximating mass elements as point masses, while others are challenging the assumptions made in the original approach. There is no explicit consensus, but productive questioning is occurring.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the assumptions related to the gravitational behavior of different shapes, particularly comparing discs and spheres. The implications of these assumptions on the overall proof are under scrutiny.

Sam Jelly
Messages
15
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
I am trying to calculate the gravitational force of mass m from a solid sphere with Radius R, mass M with uniform mass distribution. I am integrating the gravitaional force done by the thin circular plate. (I put mass m on top of every circular plate's center of mass). I know the solution to this is GmM/R^2, but my answer seems to be wrong. Is there any mistake? (mass m is on the surface of mass M)
Relevant Equations
dF = GmdM/r^2
D917654A-DC87-45BD-94A5-D8E816870D4B.png

This is my attempt at the solution. x from the equation dF = GmdM/x^2 represents the distance between the circular plate’s center of mass and mass m.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It appears that you assume that the force between the plate and the mass ##m## is the same as if the mass ##dM## of the plate were in the center of the plate. Why would it be so?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
I assumed that mass dM was in the center of each plate because the mass is distributed uniformly therefore it will be at the center of mass.
 
Sam Jelly said:
I assumed that mass dM was in the center of each plate because the mass is distributed uniformly therefore it will be at the center of mass.
This is wrong.

Essentially you are making an assumption about the overall gravity of an object where you cannot replace it by a point mass in the CoM, but you want to show it for a sphere - for which you can.
 
Sam Jelly said:
I assumed that mass dM was in the center of each plate because the mass is distributed uniformly therefore it will be at the center of mass.
If that were assumed to be true in general, there would be no point in proving it for the special case of a sphere!
 
As for a simple argument to see that it is not the case for a disc:

Consider the gravitational pull of a small part of the disc ##dm##. As long as the volume it is contained in is small, the gravitational pull at the point of interest can be approximated by the point source formula
$$
d\vec g = \frac{G\, dm}{x^2+r^2} \vec e,
$$
where ##\vec e## is a unit vector pointing from the point of interest towards the mass element. Now, by symmetry, the final gravitational field ##\vec g## must point towards the center of the disc, but there are two effects that both come into play for any ##r > 0##:
  1. The denominator ##x^2 + r^2 > x^2## so the first factor is always smaller than it would be if the mass ##dm## was on the symmetry axis.
  2. The component of the unit vector ##\vec e## will be smaller than 1
Both effects mean that the contribution of the mass ##dm## is smaller than it would be if you had put it at the center of mass. Since all mass elements (except for the one at ##r = 0##) give smaller contributions to the gravitational field than they would if they were at the center of mass, the result of approximating the full mass of the disc to be at the center of mass must overestimate the actual gravitational field.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Hill and PeroK

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K