- #1
jacob_s
- 4
- 0
Hello everyone! I'm a math major taking a university physics course, and I have a question about the proof that perfectly spherical objects have equivalent gravitational force as a point mass located in the center.
The proof in question can be seen in one form at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_theorem
It's been a while since I did this kind of calculus (solids of rotation come to mind), but I'm having trouble accepting the step 1 assumption:
"Applying Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation, the sum of the forces due to mass elements in the shaded band is
[itex]dF = \frac{Gm \;dM}{s^2}[/itex]"
It feels like there is a misuse of the infinitesimal here... the ring cut from the shell has width [itex]d\theta[/itex], therefore not all the mass is exactly [itex]s[/itex] units from [itex]m[/itex] (though it will approach this scenario as [itex]d\theta \to 0[/itex]). Consider the integration by cylinders method where the width of the cylindrical shell [itex]dx[/itex] plays the role in determining volume). It seems that we would need to involve [itex]d\theta[/itex] here in that assumption. Also, since the sphere is only infinitesimally thin, wouldn't we need to account for whatever thickness it did have in our equation? Sadly, after thorough research, every variation of the proof (there are surprisingly few references) makes similar assumptions, usually in the form of:
"by symmetry... this is the sum".
I can understand the cancellation of non-perpendicular vector components, but the suggestion that the sum of all the force can be determined so easily is confusing me. Obviously with that assumption, the rest of the math is straight-forward (though the substitutions were quite clever).
Can anyone help? I am quite possibly over-thinking this (the conclusion seems reasonable) but I tend to prefer a level of rigor that I haven't found in my searching.
Thanks!
The proof in question can be seen in one form at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_theorem
It's been a while since I did this kind of calculus (solids of rotation come to mind), but I'm having trouble accepting the step 1 assumption:
"Applying Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation, the sum of the forces due to mass elements in the shaded band is
[itex]dF = \frac{Gm \;dM}{s^2}[/itex]"
It feels like there is a misuse of the infinitesimal here... the ring cut from the shell has width [itex]d\theta[/itex], therefore not all the mass is exactly [itex]s[/itex] units from [itex]m[/itex] (though it will approach this scenario as [itex]d\theta \to 0[/itex]). Consider the integration by cylinders method where the width of the cylindrical shell [itex]dx[/itex] plays the role in determining volume). It seems that we would need to involve [itex]d\theta[/itex] here in that assumption. Also, since the sphere is only infinitesimally thin, wouldn't we need to account for whatever thickness it did have in our equation? Sadly, after thorough research, every variation of the proof (there are surprisingly few references) makes similar assumptions, usually in the form of:
"by symmetry... this is the sum".
I can understand the cancellation of non-perpendicular vector components, but the suggestion that the sum of all the force can be determined so easily is confusing me. Obviously with that assumption, the rest of the math is straight-forward (though the substitutions were quite clever).
Can anyone help? I am quite possibly over-thinking this (the conclusion seems reasonable) but I tend to prefer a level of rigor that I haven't found in my searching.
Thanks!