Proving the moment of inertia of a thinwalled hollow sphere

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the moment of inertia for a thin-walled hollow sphere using Cartesian coordinates instead of polar coordinates. The initial equation y^2 + x^2 = r^2 is clarified as representing a circle, not a sphere. A surface integral is proposed to calculate inertia, specifically 8ρ∫∫√(x^2 r^2/(r^2 - x^2 - y^2)) dy dx, with the suggestion to evaluate it for one octant and multiply by eight due to symmetry. The setup of the integral is based on the definition of inertia, which involves integrating the distance squared times mass. A correction is noted regarding the integral, indicating that x^2 should actually be x^4 inside the square root.
parsa418
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I was wondering if there is any way to prove the moment of inertia of a thin walled hollow sphere by using y^2 + x^2 = r^2 instead of using the angle method. I want to use a Cartesian coordinate system not a polar coordinate system.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First of all y^2 + x^2 = r^2 describes a circle not a sphere.
And yes, you can calculate inertia in Cartesian coordinates by the definition of inertia, you just have to evaluate this surface integral:

8\rho \int_{0}^{r}\int_{0}^{\sqrt{r^2-x^2}}\sqrt{\frac{x^2 r^2}{r^2 - x^2 - y^2}}dy dx

Tell me what you get.
 
Hi thank you for replying
could you please tell me how you got that integral exactly? as in how did you set it up?
 
use the definition of inertia, distance squared times mass. So integrate x^2 times each surface element. I did one octant and multiplied by 8 due to symmetry.

To integrate you need to know what a surface integral is, otherwise I can't help you much.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_integral

Also I made a typo, the x^2 should be x^4 if its going to be inside the square root
 
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...
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?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top