3 ms·
>If you naively apply Newton's force of gravity, between two masses at a distance, Fg = Gm1m2/d^2, you get an infinite force when a marble (mass 1) is at the ce
by fsckboy 3y ago
>If you naively apply Newton's force of gravity, between two masses at a distance, Fg = Gm1m2/d^2, you get an infinite force when a marble (mass 1) is at the center (distance = 0) of a planet (mass 2)
and, for the people who might not have been exposed to the idea in a physics class, that marble at a distance from the planet has a potential energy, energy it would give up were it to be released and allowed to fall toward the planet. But, if instead you did work against the gravity to pull the marble farther away from the planet, that work would be saved up as an increase in the marble's potential energy. And that would continue till you pulled the marble infinitely far away, at which point the force of attraction would be 0 and the marble's potential energy would be zero. The only way this works is if the potential energy of the marble is a negative number, in which case maybe the singularity isn't such a bad idea
- sigmoid10 3y ago>at which point the force of attraction would be 0 and the marble's potential energy would be zero That's wrong. If you actually stick to newtonian physics (because the picture changes completely in GR), then you can define the potential arbitrarily at infinite distance. Since a body with finite density will see a finite variation in gravitational potential, you could just define the potential at infinity such that it is zero at its lowest point by adding a constant. That's because forces in physics arise from the potential field's gradient - not the field itself. So any constant will just disappear in the derivative. Now, if you go to GR, the story becomes a lot more complicated, since gravitational potential energy isn't even well defined.