What is the most efficient method for solving this gravitational field problem?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving a gravitational field problem involving a thin hemispherical shell. A participant initially attempted to use spherical coordinates but found the resulting integrals complex and time-consuming. Another contributor suggested a more efficient approach using the principle of superposition, combining the gravitational field of a full sphere with that of an imaginary hemisphere of negative mass. This method simplifies the calculation, leading to the conclusion that the gravitational field at point Q is given by the formula (2GM/9R^2) - I_0. The conversation highlights the value of alternative problem-solving strategies in physics.
Saitama
Messages
4,244
Reaction score
93

Homework Statement


A thin hemispherical shell of mass M and radius R is placed as shown in figure. The magnitude of gravitational field at P due to the hemispherical shell is ##I_0##. The magnitude of gravitational field at Q due to thin hemispherical shell is given by

A)##I_0/2##

B)##I_0##

C)##\frac{2GM}{9R^2}-I_0##

D)##\frac{2GM}{9R^2}+I_0##


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I tried the problem using spherical coordinates and ended up with some messy integrals. Since this is an exam problem, I wonder if I really need to solve those integrals as it would take a lot of time. (I solved the integrals using Wolfram Alpha and the result was not nice so I immediately dropped the approach.) I believe there is a shorter way to solve this.

Any help is appreciated. Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • hemisphere.png
    hemisphere.png
    4.3 KB · Views: 461
Physics news on Phys.org
Pranav-Arora said:

Homework Statement


A thin hemispherical shell of mass M and radius R is placed as shown in figure. The magnitude of gravitational field at P due to the hemispherical shell is ##I_0##. The magnitude of gravitational field at Q due to thin hemispherical shell is given by

A)##I_0/2##

B)##I_0##

C)##\frac{2GM}{9R^2}-I_0##

D)##\frac{2GM}{9R^2}+I_0##


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I tried the problem using spherical coordinates and ended up with some messy integrals. Since this is an exam problem, I wonder if I really need to solve those integrals as it would take a lot of time. (I solved the integrals using Wolfram Alpha and the result was not nice so I immediately dropped the approach.) I believe there is a shorter way to solve this.

Any help is appreciated. Thanks!

There is a much faster way. You can picture the field due to the hemisphere as the sum of the field from a whole sphere and the field from an imaginary hemisphere of mass -M covering the lower half of the sphere.
 
Hi Dick! :)

Dick said:
There is a much faster way. You can picture the field due to the hemisphere as the sum of the field from a whole sphere and the field from an imaginary hemisphere of mass -M covering the lower half of the sphere.

I consider a sphere of radius R and mass 2M.

The field at P is given by:

$$\frac{2GM}{9R^2}+E_{-M}=I_0=E_M$$

where ##E_{-M}## represents field at P due to the imaginary hemisphere of mass -M and ##E_M## represents the field at P due to hemisphere of mass M.

The field at Q is given by:

$$\frac{2GM}{9R^2}+E'_{-M}$$

where ##E'_{-M}## is the field at Q due to imaginary hemisphere of mass -M.

Since ##E'_{-M}=-E_M=-I_0##, the field at Q is given by:

$$\frac{2GM}{9R^2}-I_0$$

Is this correct?
 
Pranav-Arora said:
Hi Dick! :)



I consider a sphere of radius R and mass 2M.

The field at P is given by:

$$\frac{2GM}{9R^2}+E_{-M}=I_0=E_M$$

where ##E_{-M}## represents field at P due to the imaginary hemisphere of mass -M and ##E_M## represents the field at P due to hemisphere of mass M.

The field at Q is given by:

$$\frac{2GM}{9R^2}+E'_{-M}$$

where ##E'_{-M}## is the field at Q due to imaginary hemisphere of mass -M.

Since ##E'_{-M}=-E_M=-I_0##, the field at Q is given by:

$$\frac{2GM}{9R^2}-I_0$$

Is this correct?

Hi Pranav-Arora! Yes, that's correct. This sort of a method is called 'using superposition'. For sort of obvious reasons.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Dick said:
Hi Pranav-Arora! Yes, that's correct. This sort of a method is called 'using superposition'. For sort of obvious reasons.

Yes, I have heard of this method, thanks a lot Dick! :smile:
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top