What is wrong with my derivation for the moment of inertia of a sphere?

AI Thread Summary
The derivation for the moment of inertia of a sphere presented results in (3/5)MR^2, which is incorrect. The error arises from using the moment of inertia formula for a spherical shell instead of the correct formula for a solid sphere. The moment of inertia for a thin spherical shell is (2/3)MR^2, which should be incorporated into the derivation. The correct moment of inertia for a solid sphere is (2/5)MR^2. The discussion highlights the importance of using the appropriate formulas for different geometrical shapes in physics calculations.
eg2333
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Ok, so I thought about a derivation for the moment of inertia, but my answer comes out to (3/5)MR^2

Basically, what I did was I considered the sphere as a sum of infinitesimally thin spherical shells.

The moment of inertia for one shell is dI=(r^2)*dm

where dm=(M/V)*4*pi*r^2*dr

where V=(4/3)*pi*R^3

so the equation dI=3*pi*M*r^4*dr when simplified.

Integrating this from 0 to R (Summing up the spherical shells from the center to the edge of the big sphere) gives me (3/5)*M*R^2. What is wrong with this derivation? :(
 
Physics news on Phys.org
According to wikipedia, moment of inertia for a spherical shell is 2/3 M R^2 , not what you use.
 
It is actually (2/5)*MR^2 for a sphere. The method I used clearly gives the incorrect answer, which is why I'm asking to see if anyone can tell me where the fault is.
 
Nabeshin isn't talking about the sphere, but a spherical shell. As I just said in your identical thread,

"The moment of inertia of a thin shell is (2/3)MR^2, not MR^2, so your original dI should be (2/3)r^2 dm - there's your missing factor of 2/3. "
 
Mute said:
Nabeshin isn't talking about the sphere, but a spherical shell. As I just said in your identical thread,

"The moment of inertia of a thin shell is (2/3)MR^2, not MR^2, so your original dI should be (2/3)r^2 dm - there's your missing factor of 2/3. "

Thanks for spelling that out, apparently I wasn't clear enough.
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
I know that mass does not affect the acceleration in a simple pendulum undergoing SHM, but how does the mass on the spring that makes up the elastic pendulum affect its acceleration? Certainly, there must be a change due to the displacement from equilibrium caused by each differing mass? I am talking about finding the acceleration at a specific time on each trial with different masses and comparing them. How would they compare and why?
Back
Top