- Thank you received: 0
Gravity at the center of the Earth?
- tvanflandern
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
21 years 10 months ago #4002
by tvanflandern
Replied by tvanflandern on topic Reply from Tom Van Flandern
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>I wonder how far from the center of a planet the zero G extends and does the gravity increase linearly with distance or increase steeply only a short distance from the center.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
Remember the uniform spherical shell theorem? Consider a point a distance x from the center. All planet-centered spherical shells with radius greater than x contribute nothing to the force on x. All planet-centered spherical shells with radius less than x act as if all their mass were concentrated at the center. So x feels an acceleration of Gm/x^2, where m is the mass in all shells interior to x.
If these all had the same density rho, then their combined mass would be m = rho (4/3 pi x^3) [the product of density and volume]. That makes the force on x equal to 4/3 G pi rho x. It goes up linearly with x until the density starts to drop off significantly. -|Tom|-
Remember the uniform spherical shell theorem? Consider a point a distance x from the center. All planet-centered spherical shells with radius greater than x contribute nothing to the force on x. All planet-centered spherical shells with radius less than x act as if all their mass were concentrated at the center. So x feels an acceleration of Gm/x^2, where m is the mass in all shells interior to x.
If these all had the same density rho, then their combined mass would be m = rho (4/3 pi x^3) [the product of density and volume]. That makes the force on x equal to 4/3 G pi rho x. It goes up linearly with x until the density starts to drop off significantly. -|Tom|-
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 years 10 months ago #4251
by Ben
Replied by Ben on topic Reply from Ben
OK did the math and sketched it out (my brain is visually orientated) I've got it now. Thanks for the help.
Ben
Ben
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 years 10 months ago #3909
by jacques
Replied by jacques on topic Reply from
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Remember the uniform spherical shell theorem? <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
I understand this theorem and I see that it is widely used in astronomy, but sorry for my ignorance, was that theorem proved?
Will a limited range for gravity break that theorem?
I understand this theorem and I see that it is widely used in astronomy, but sorry for my ignorance, was that theorem proved?
Will a limited range for gravity break that theorem?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- tvanflandern
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
21 years 10 months ago #4544
by tvanflandern
Replied by tvanflandern on topic Reply from Tom Van Flandern
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[jacques]: I understand this theorem and I see that it is widely used in astronomy, but sorry for my ignorance, was that theorem proved?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
Yes. It is proved rigorously by setting up volume integrals and evaluating them. It is an easy proof if one knows integral calculus.
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Will a limited range for gravity break that theorem?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
No. The limited range is so large compared to the size of stars or planets that the effect is negligible. For the structure of galaxies, limited range of gravity is significant, and the uniform spherical shell theorem no longer holds. -|Tom|-
Yes. It is proved rigorously by setting up volume integrals and evaluating them. It is an easy proof if one knows integral calculus.
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Will a limited range for gravity break that theorem?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
No. The limited range is so large compared to the size of stars or planets that the effect is negligible. For the structure of galaxies, limited range of gravity is significant, and the uniform spherical shell theorem no longer holds. -|Tom|-
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 years 10 months ago #3922
by jacques
Replied by jacques on topic Reply from
Thank you!
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 years 9 months ago #4332
by Jim
Replied by Jim on topic Reply from
As everyone except myself is convinced the pressure at the mass center of a sphere increases as the distance from the mass center is reduced maybe I should forget this and not ask, but after reviewing the past posts on this topic I'm puzzled about several details. First how does the model of inceasing pressure keep the pressure from going to infinity as I said early on? If the pressure goes higher because the area of the sphere is less and less it seems to me at the mass center the area gets so small as the radius of the sphere goes to a very small size. The pressure at a millimeter radius must be very great(too much for anything I would suggest). The other points are hard to put in words.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.514 seconds