What's wrong with this derivation for rotational energy of a sphere?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of rotational energy for a sphere, specifically addressing discrepancies in calculations and assumptions made during the integration process. Participants explore the mathematical setup and physical reasoning behind the derivation, examining both the energy of a disk and the integration of infinitesimal disks to find the total rotational energy of a sphere.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an initial derivation for the energy of a disk and attempts to extend this to a sphere by integrating the rotational kinetic energy of infinitesimal disks.
  • Another participant points out an error in treating mass as a constant during the setup of the second integral.
  • A later reply provides a corrected approach to the integration, introducing a variable mass density and recalculating the energy expression, arriving at a different result.
  • Some participants discuss the preference for evaluating the moment of inertia (I) first and then applying the common factor of \(\frac{1}{2}\omega^2\) to simplify the calculation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best approach to derive the rotational energy of a sphere. Multiple competing views on the integration method and the treatment of mass density remain evident throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations in the assumptions made regarding mass distribution and the integration process, as well as the dependence on the definitions of variables used in the calculations.

henpen
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
First, energy of a disk:

\int \frac{dm}{2}r^2 \omega^2 =\frac{\omega^2}{2}\int_0^R m\frac{2 \pi r dr}{\pi R^2}r^2 =\frac{m\omega^2}{ R^2}\int_0^R r^3 dr=\frac{m\omega^2 R^2}{4 }
Which agrees with other sources. However, in the following lies my problem:

The equation for a circle: r^2+x^2=R^2 \Rightarrow r^2=R^2-x^2

Energy of a sphere- integrate infinitesimal disks's rotational kinetic energy (assuming rotational energy is additive, which makes sense physically), all of which have their centre through the x-axis:

\int_0^R \frac{m\omega^2 r^2}{4 }dx=\frac{m\omega^2}{4 }\int_0^R(R^2-x^2)dx=\frac{m\omega^2}{4 }\frac{2R^3}{3}=\frac{m\omega^2 R^3}{6 }

This differs from the result here of \frac{I \omega^2}{2}=\frac{m\omega^2 R^2}{5 } quite substantially. Where have I gone wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
henpen said:
Where have I gone wrong?
In setting up your second integral you have treated m as a constant.
 
Gah! Thanks for that.
 
\int_0^R \frac{m(r)\omega^2 r^2}{4 }dx=\frac{\omega^2 }{4 }\int_0^R m(r)r^2 dx
m(r)= \rho \pi r^2 = k r^2
\frac{k\omega^2 }{4 }\int_0^R r^4 dx=\frac{k\omega^2 }{4 }\int_0^R (R^2-x^2)^2 dx=\frac{k\omega^2 }{4 }\int_0^R R^4+x^4-2R^2x^2 dx
=\frac{k\omega^2 }{4 }(R^5+\frac{1}{5}R^5-\frac{1}{3}2R^5 )=\frac{k\omega^2 }{4 }\frac{1}{15}(15R^5+3R^5-10R^5 )=\frac{k\omega^2 }{4 }\frac{1}{15}(8R^5 )
=\frac{2k\omega^2 R^5 }{15 }

k=\pi \rho = \pi \frac{M}{\frac{4}{3}\pi R^3}=\frac{3M}{4R^3}

\frac{2k\omega^2 R^5 }{15 }=\frac{3M}{4R^3}\frac{2\omega^2 R^5 }{15 }=\frac{M \omega^2 R^2}{10}

That's correct: excellent!
 
Since \frac{1}{2}\omega^2 is in common to all discs, it’s (arguably) nicer to evaluate I, and, having found it, to multiply it by \frac{1}{2}\omega^2 afterwards.
 
Philip Wood said:
Since \frac{1}{2}\omega^2 is in common to all discs, it’s (arguably) nicer to evaluate I, and, having found it, to multiply it by \frac{1}{2}\omega^2 afterwards.
That's how I would do it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
758
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K