A spherical star has a (volumetric mass) density of ρ ( r ) = 3 − r , where r is the distance from the star's center, for 0 ≤ r ≤ 3 .
At what distance from the center is the star's gravitational field the strongest?
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
Another brilliant solution. Thank you!
For the benefit of other readers, could you please explain how we know that "since the star is radially symmetric, it gravitates as though all of its mass is at the origin"?
Log in to reply
I have included an addendum explaining the justification for that statement. Thanks
Log in to reply
Yes, exactly! Thank you!
Newton proves this fact in the Principia, but your proof is a lot more elegant!
Log in to reply
@Otto Bretscher – I once did it by dividing the sphere into disks, and integrating the contributions from the disks. That worked, but it was rather tedious.
Also, for the other assertion "Additionally, the mass farther out than makes no contribution to the gravitational field strength", there is a nice intuition.
Imagine an object inside a spherical shell as being at the vertex of a cone with a small vertex angle. Then the cone will intersect the spherical shell. It's easy to see (use similar triangles, for example) that the area of the region is proportional to the square of the distance to that region. The mass is proportional to the area and thus the square of the distance, so the gravitational force of that region, which is inversely proportional to the distance, is constant in magnitude. Instead of a single cone, imagine a double cone. Now you have two forces of the same magnitude, in opposite directions which cancel out. The same is true for any direction so the net force is zero.
The answer didn’t specify a decimal point accuracy, so it must be an integer. It’s not 0, and must be less than or equal to 3. That leaves 3 options and 3 guesses. For me, it was my second guess that yielded the correct answer.
QED
Clever, but there was still a bit of luck involved: The answer could have been a terminating decimal like 3.125.
It was a canonical execution of Shephard’s lemma
I had no idea, soust plugged in 2. Although 2 is said to be the correct solution, there is no credit to me here! These problems here are mostly too difficult to solve for me :-(
Log in to reply
This stuff is not really difficult, but you do have to take the time to study vector calculus first.
I have no words. What a brilliant way to answer a question!
Yes! That one is easier since the density is uniform.
g=(4πG/r^2)Integral{ro(r')((r')^2)dr'},
substituting, ro(r')=3-r', and integrating
g=(4πG){r-(r/2)^2}, setting d(g)/dr=0,
Answer is r=2
Field at a distance x (≤3) = ∫ 0 x x 2 G ( 4 π y 2 d y ) ( 3 − y )
= k ( x − 4 x 2 ) , k is some constant.
Maximum value of above function occurs at x = 2
Yes, this is basically Steven's solution, all compressed into one formula. Thank you!
The mass inside a sphere with radius R is given by M = ∫ 0 R 4 π r 2 ρ ( r ) d r = π ∫ 0 R 1 2 r 2 − 4 r 3 d r = π ( 4 R 3 − R 4 ) . The gravitational field is G M / R 2 = π G ( 4 R − R 2 ) . Its maximum is where the derivative of this is 0, so when 4 = 2 R , so at R = 2 .
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Find the mass out to a particular radius a .
d M = ρ d V = ρ 4 π r 2 d r = ( 3 − r ) 4 π r 2 d r = 4 π ( 3 r 2 − r 3 ) d r M ( a ) = 4 π ∫ 0 a ( 3 r 2 − r 3 ) d r = 4 π ( a 3 − 4 a 4 )
Since the star is radially symmetric, it gravitates as though all of its mass is at the origin. Additionally, the mass farther out than a makes no contribution to the gravitational field strength. The corresponding gravitational field strength is:
g ( a ) = a 2 G M ( a ) = 4 π G ( a − 4 a 2 )
To find the value of a which extremizes this function, take the derivative and set equal to zero.
1 − 2 a = 0 ⟹ a = 2
We can try a few other values of a to confirm that this is indeed a maximum and not a minimum.
Addendum:
Here is some further justification of the statement "Since the star is radially symmetric, it gravitates as though all of its mass is at the origin. Additionally, the mass farther out than a makes no contribution to the gravitational field strength".
Recall Gauss's Law for gravitation (here, the negative sign just means that the gravity pulls toward the origin - I ignored this earlier because it wasn't relevant):
∫ ∫ s g ⋅ d S = − 4 π G M
Here, M is the enclosed mass within the sphere of radius a , naturally excluding the effects of mass not enclosed by the sphere. Since the mass distribution is radially symmetric, the gravity field is constant in magnitude over the sphere surface, and is everywhere parallel to the surface normal. Hence:
∫ ∫ s g ⋅ d S = ∫ ∫ s g d S = g ∫ ∫ s d S = g S = g 4 π a 2 = − 4 π G M ( a ) g = − a 2 G M ( a )
It is therefore apparent that the solid sphere of mass gravitates as though it were a point-mass at the origin.