Why does everything in the Universe form a ball or Sphere?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the formation of spherical shapes in celestial bodies, primarily due to gravitational forces. Gravity pulls matter toward the center of mass, resulting in a spherical configuration as it is the most energy-efficient shape with the lowest surface area for a given volume. Smaller bodies, such as 20-kilometer asteroids, do not form spheres due to insufficient gravitational pull to overcome their mechanical strength, leading to irregular shapes. The conversation also touches on the potential for discovering more energy-efficient shapes, although current understanding supports the sphere as the optimal form.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of gravitational forces and their effects on mass distribution
  • Basic knowledge of fluid dynamics as it relates to celestial bodies
  • Familiarity with concepts of energy efficiency in geometric shapes
  • Introduction to differential calculus and its applications in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the principles of gravitational physics and how they influence celestial body formation
  • Explore fluid dynamics in astrophysics, particularly in relation to planetary formation
  • Investigate energy efficiency in geometric shapes, focusing on spheres versus other configurations
  • Study differential calculus applications in physical sciences, especially in relation to shape optimization
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, physicists, students of astrophysics, and anyone interested in the fundamental principles of celestial mechanics and the shapes of astronomical bodies.

blackstar5000
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I want to know why everything in the universe forms a Ball or Sphere? Is gravity the cause of this? If so why? For example, If we were to pick the sphere apart can we see the source of gravity? Is gravity also a ball or sphere and can we grasp and see it? Why do we not ever see square planets or hexagon shaped stars etc...? Sorry, I am new to the forum and I tend to ask strange questions.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Planets and stars are round because their gravitational field acts as though it originates from the center of the body and pulls everything toward it. With its large body and internal heating a planet or star behaves like a fluid, and over long periods of time succumbs to the gravitational pull from its center of gravity. The only way to get all the mass as close to planet's center of gravity as possible is to form a sphere.

With much smaller bodies, such as the 20-kilometer asteroids the gravitational pull is too weak to overcome the asteroid's mechanical strength. As a result, these bodies do not form spheres. Rather they maintain irregular, fragmentary shapes.
 
A sphere has the lowest possible surface area required to bound any given volume.
 
Chronos said:
A sphere has the lowest possible surface area required to bound any given volume.

Therefore, it is the most energy-efficient configuration.
 
Are there more energy efficient shapes? Spheres seem to be the most common of course but the universe is a big place and we have much searching to do, is it possible that we find or someone comes up with a shape more efficient than a sphere? Not saying that it is but for example Leonardo's 72 sided figure? What would be the implications of finding this out sort of like aerodynamics but for energy conservation?
 
I believe differential calculus will tell us that a sphere is the most efficient shape. The taller the mountain gets, the heavier it gets, which means at some point it won't be able to support itself and crash to the surface
 
Right, any other shape is just going to be a spherical planet with some really weird mountains on it. And if there's any kind of disturbance that knocks a piece off, regardless of whether its weather, tectonic activity, meteor impacts, the result is going to be that pieces roll downhill. Give it enough time, and you get a sphere (that's flattened a bit because of its rotation).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
6K