It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by jiggerj
I have a question for you. In this image you have three masses made of the same materials within a vacuume space, but they are different in size. My question is. Which mass attracks which? Or do they stay in the same positions?
I would assume that the highest mass attracts the others.
Originally posted by alfa1
Originally posted by jiggerj
I have a question for you. In this image you have three masses made of the same materials within a vacuume space, but they are different in size. My question is. Which mass attracks which? Or do they stay in the same positions?
I would assume that the highest mass attracts the others.
All masses attract all masses. Some more than others.
They will end up (in a bunch) somewhat near the upper right side of the triangle, location biased towards the larger masses.
Originally posted by punkinworks10
reply to post by spy66
Spy, you are misunderstanding what a " vacuum" is.
A vacuum is an absence of gaseous phase matter, not an absence of all matter.
Like so many people have said it has no effect on the force of gravity, none what so ever.
And all mass has a gravitational field, very likely down to the quantum level, for those interested look into quantum gravity detection experiment being put together by Cal State Humbolt, fascinating stuff.
Anyhoo, Spy in your OP, the scenario you have works like this,
Your tunnel is a vacuum, the only effect it will have is an absence of media to provide friction, that's it ,it will not effect gravity at all.
So now , the force of gravity follows an inverse square relationship with distance from the center of mass, that is to say the force falls off at a rate that is proportional to the square of the distance between the objects.
That's why the acceleration due to gravity , which at the earths surface is 32/sec^2, falls off so quickly.
The weightless of " space" is not a gravityless environment, it is micro gravity environment, as long as there is mass there is gravity.
With all that in mind, if one were to drop your mass down the tunnel from the north to south pole, your mass would start with a specific amount of gravitation potential energy, it will accelerate at 32 feet/sec^2, to start with. It will change because the of the differing densities of the materials that make up the earth and their relative masses. But to keep it simple we will say it falls at a 32ft/sec^2. As it falls the gravitational potential energy is turned into kinetic energy, according to the equation U=mgh, where U is gravitational potential energy
m is mass, g, acceleration due to gravity 32ft/sec^2 and h is height of object or in this case the distance from the theoretical center of gravity.
Now a body in motion will stay in motion a body a rest will stay at rest, that is verbal expression of conservation of momentum. In absence of external forces acting on a moving body a moving body will stay in motion.
Back to the hole, your mass accelerates toward the centers of gravity, turning gravitational potential energy to kinetic energy. As it it approaches the center the force of gravity in front of it increases, because of the increasing density, but conversely as you pass through the earth all of the mass behind the falling mass has a gravitational effect on the motion of the moving mass slightly slowing it down.
This is where I differ from the poster who said, that in a vacuum, it would be a simple oscillation scenario and the mass would oscillate back and forth forever, it would not. If your are using the.force of gravity as a force in the analysis, you can't also discount it.
Classical newtonian physics treats the earth as a point mass, but if you are looking at the mass of the earth as as a system then you have have to account for the mass in relationship to the position of the object and differing forces of gravity due to changes in density as it moves through the gravitational system that is the earth as a whole. It would appear to follow a simple straight line oscillation back and forth losing energy and eventually settling and coming to rest at the bottom of the gravity well.
No it would follow a extremely eliptic path orbiting the theoretical center of gravity. This orbit would decay over time in to rotational motion of the original mass at the center of the earth.
So the mass would swing back and forth not going quite as far each trip and it would eventually come to rest at the center of the earth, spinning, at a very high rate it might add as momentum must be conserved.
All of the momentum of the original mass has to be maintained it is converted from linear momentum to rotational momentum.
This is why stars and planets rotate around thier own axes and why planets and asteroids and comets rotate around stars and why star systems orbit the center of the galaxy and galaxies orbit even larger groups of each other.
Originally posted by punkinworks10
reply to post by VoidHawk
Thank you VoidHawk,
I detect a Peter F Hamilton fan,
I think that as a sci fi writer Hamilton has done more to divine the path of future technology than any other writer in in the recent past.Some of the ideas he has posited in his books are aleeady coming to pass.
How can it be effected by earths gravity inside the vacuume tunnel
Originally posted by spy66
My question is:
If you built a vacuume tunnel that runs from the North pole throught earths center and to the South Pole. And on the North Pole you placed a 10kg weight into the vacuume tunnel. Would the weight fall/travel to the South Pole?
My teacher/Professor tells me that the 10kg weight would fall to the South Pole. I am telling him that the 10kg weight would not travel anywhere.
I have also googled this question and found that a lot of other people agree with my teacher. But they are all wrong. Does anybody here know why my teacher is wrong?
Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by spy66
How can it be effected by earths gravity inside the vacuume tunnel
because you get gravity in a vacuum..
Originally posted by spy66
If there is gravity the vacuum column should have a specific weight.
Originally posted by VoidHawk
Originally posted by punkinworks10
reply to post by VoidHawk
Thank you VoidHawk,
I detect a Peter F Hamilton fan,
I think that as a sci fi writer Hamilton has done more to divine the path of future technology than any other writer in in the recent past.Some of the ideas he has posited in his books are aleeady coming to pass.
""I detect a Peter F Hamilton fan""
I'm still looking behind me, how did you know that?
ETA: stupid me....my name
Yes, fantastic stuff.
edit on 20-10-2012 by VoidHawk because: (no reason given)