What is the gravitational field of a flat disc?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The gravitational field of a flat disc with radius A and constant density ρ is calculated using the potential function Φ(z) = -Gρ2π(√(a² + z²) - z). The gravitational field G(z) is derived as G(z) = -Gρ2π(z/√(a² + z²) - 1). However, there is a discontinuity at z=0, where the force is defined as zero, indicating that the potential function must be symmetric about the disk. The correct potential function is Φ(z) = -G2πρ(√(a² + z²) - |z|), leading to a force per unit mass f(z) = 2πρG(z/√(a² + z²) - z/|z|).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of gravitational potential and fields
  • Familiarity with calculus, particularly differentiation
  • Knowledge of the absolute value function and its properties
  • Basic concepts of symmetry in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of gravitational fields from potential functions
  • Learn about the properties of the absolute value function in calculus
  • Explore the implications of discontinuities in physical systems
  • Investigate gravitational fields of other geometries, such as spheres and cylinders
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, particularly those studying classical mechanics and gravitational theory, as well as educators and researchers looking to deepen their understanding of gravitational fields and potential functions.

speg
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hey guys, so I'm back in school after an 8-month break, and I'm feeling a bit rusty :rolleyes:

So I've got a flat disc of radius A, with constant density p, in the z=0 plane. I want to calculate the gravitational field at any point up or down the z-axis.

I integrated the potential over the disc got the correct potential function (which is given) of :

\Phi(z)=-G\rho2\pi(\sqrt{a^2+z^2}-z)
So now I just take the negative derivative of this to get the Gravitational field, right?
G(z)=-\nabla\Phi(z)
G(z)=-G\rho2\pi(\frac{z}{\sqrt{a^2+z^2}}-1)

But this means there is a force at z=0 when I think there should not be... :confused:

How do I make a new line in Latex? \\ this doesn't seem to work? :@
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
speg said:
So I've got a flat disc of radius A, with constant density p, in the z=0 plane. I want to calculate the gravitational field at any point up or down the z-axis.

I integrated the potential over the disc got the correct potential function (which is given) of :

\Phi(z)=-G\rho2\pi(\sqrt{a^2+z^2}-z)
So now I just take the negative derivative of this to get the Gravitational field, right?
G(z)=-\nabla\Phi(z)
G(z)=-G\rho2\pi(\frac{z}{\sqrt{a^2+z^2}}-1)

But this means there is a force at z=0 when I think there should not be...
What is the thickness of the disc? Where does that appear in your calculation?

The force/unit mass at (0,0,z) from a ring element of the disc of radius r thickness h and width dr would be:

dF = Gdm/s^2 = \frac{G\rho 2\pi r hdr}{r^2 + z^2}

assuming h to be small compared to z. Integrate that from r = 0 to r = A.

AM
 
Last edited:
The potential is not correct, since it is not symmetric about the disk.
The proper potential is:
\Phi(z)=-G2\pi\rho(\sqrt{a^{2}+z^{2}}-|z|)
yielding the proper force per unit mass along the z-axis (in the positive vertical direction) :
f(z)=2\pi\rho{G}(\frac{z}{\sqrt{a^{2}+z^{2}}}-\frac{z}{|z|})
The limiting values as z goes to zero,
\lim_{z\to{0}^{+}}f(z)=-2\pi\rho{G}, \lim_{z\to{0}^{-}}f(z)=2\pi\rho{G}
are the strengths of the force just outside the disk, on either side.
There is a leap of discontinuity across the disk, where AT the origin, the force is, indeed 0.
 
Last edited:
\frac{d|z|}{dz}=\frac{z}{|z|}?
 
speg said:
\frac{d|z|}{dz}=\frac{z}{|z|}?
Quite so. :smile:
The derivative of the absolute value function is not defined at z=0.
 
And so F cannot be defined at z=0? So we take that to mean there is no force there?
 
speg said:
And so F cannot be defined at z=0? So we take that to mean there is no force there?
No, it doesn't. It just means you have to consider the z=0 case separately.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
870
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
64
Views
5K