Simple derivation: sphere contracting under gravity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on deriving the volume reduction rate of a contracting sphere under gravity as stated by Roger Penrose. The volume of a sphere is given by 4/3πr³, leading to a derivative dV/dr of 4πr². The gravitational acceleration is expressed as GM/r², and the participant seeks to understand how to combine these concepts using the chain rule. They recognize that multiplying dV/dr by the gravitational acceleration yields the correct result of 4πGM but are unsure of the mathematical justification for this operation. Clarification on the validity of applying the chain rule in this context is requested.
HowardTheDuck
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
Hi Guys, I'm reading Roger Penrose's book "The Road to Reality" at the moment and I wonder if you could help me out with a pretty simple derivation which he doesn't describe in complete detail.
On page 399 he considers a sphere of mass contracting under gravity, and says "The rate of volume reduction is 4πGM". Can you help me derive this, please? It shouldn't be too difficult, it's just beyond me!

OK, what do we know. The volume of a sphere is 4/3πr3. So dV/dr is 4πr2.
And the acceleration (d2r/dt2) due to Newton's law of gravity would be GM/r2. Can we combine these via the chain rule or similar to get the rate (acceleration?) of volume reduction equal to 4πGM.

Thanks a lot.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I can see that if you simply multiply the 4πr2 by the GM/r2 then you get the right answer. But I don't see how that's a valid thing to do.
I don't see how it's valid to multiply dV/dr by d2r/dt2 (by the chain rule?) to get the right answer.
Any help appreciated.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...

Similar threads

Back
Top