N
mg
Surface of spandex
Gary D. WhiteNational Science Foundation and
American Institute of [email protected]
04/22/23 1Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford
The Spandex, for demonstrating celestial phenomena:
• The Solar System– Orbits, precession– Escape velocity– Planetary Rings– Roche Limit– Density differentiation– Early solar system
agglomeration models• Earth and moon
– Binary Systems– Tidal effects
• See ‘Modelling Tidal Effects’, AJP, April 1993, GDW and students
NOTE: “Gravity wells” rather than “curved space-time” or “embedding diagrams”
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 2
Video fun
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 3
From XKCD (A webcomic of romance,sarcasm, math, and language, http://xkcd.com/681/)
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 4
…but are spandex
gravity wells really like
3-D space?
Wrong things that I thought I knew about the shape of the Spandex
– “It is like a soap bubble between rings.”
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 5
rotate
Better known as the curve of a hanging chain
…or perhaps in St. Louis, the curve of
the Arch
…except data can’t
be fit to the appropriate hyperbolic cosine…
Pull middle ring down---this has long been known to
produce a catenary curve
– “Oh, right, it is like a weighted drum head.”
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 6
Wrong things that I thought I knew about the shape of the Spandex
So, it solves Laplace’s
equation with cylindrical symmetry,
h=A + B*ln(R)
…except our original
data couldn’t be fit to any
logarithmic form…
M
This would make it like 2-D gravity, like orbits around
a long stick of mass M
…until we learned to stretch it as we attached it
thanks to Don Lemons and TJ Lipscombe, AJP 70, 2002
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 7
Connection to general relativity
• Wilson (1920!- Phil. Mag. 40, 703) gives the metric for an infinite wire of mass to be (to leading order in m)
where ; …incredibly small for any reasonable linear density…in the slow speed, small mass density limit this means that the the Newtonian effective potential predicted by Einstein’s equations of a wire (or long stick or bar galaxy or other prolate distribution, perhaps) is given by
…In other words, logarithmic, as perhaps expected.04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 8
22 4 2 8 2 4 2 2 2m m mds dt d dz d
2 4 2 4 ln 2 200(1 ) / 2 (1 ) / 2 (1 ) / 2 (2 4 ln ...) / 2m m
Newton g c c e c m c
2 27/ [3 10 / ]m G c x m kg
Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford
9
…so “pre-stretched” Spandex potential well is like the well around a skinny stick of mass m…but what about rolling marbles on Spandex? Is that really like planets moving in a logarithmic potential? To relay that
story, let’s recall some of the coolest early science
planets period, T radius from sun, R T-squared R-squared T-cubed R-cubed(in years) (in earth-sun distances)
Mercury 0.241 0.387 0.0580 0.150 0.0140 0.058Venus 0.616 0.723 0.379 0.523 0.2338 0.378Earth 1 1 1 1 1.0000 1.000Mars 1.88 1.52 3.54 2.321 6.65 3.54Jupiter 11.9 5.20 141.6 27.1 1685.16 140.8Saturn 29.5 9.54 870.3 91.0 25672.38 867.9
So, in natural units, T2 = R3 for planets.
(In unnatural units, T2 is proportional to R3)
04/22/23 9
We determined Kepler’s law analog for unstretched Spandex for circular orbits by doing some experiments…
• For fixed M, unstretched Spandex has ln(T)=(1/3)ln(R2) +b– So, Spandex is T3/R2 = k…– Kepler Law for real
planets about sun is T2/R3
= c.• Curiously close, but no cigar; • What is pre-stretched spandex
Kepler’s law analog for circular orbits?
Let’s come back to that…for now notice how noisy the data is…
Kepler's Law analog
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
-6 -4 -2 0
ln(R^2/sqrt(M))
ln(T
) line has slope 1/3y-intercept ~ 1.35
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 10
x
mgh(x)
About rolling on the Spandex…let’s first consider the lower dimensional case---modelling one
dimensional oscillations with motion in a vertical plane
• One-D motion
Diff. wrt time to get
Assume , then
Rolling in a vertical plane in a valley given by h(x):
butand no-slip rolling means
so
21
1
2D xE mV U x
0
2 20
( )
/ 1 ( )roll
rollroll
k mgh x
m m I a h x
2 2 21 1 1
2 2 2roll x yE mV mV I mgh x
tan( ) ( )y x xV V V h x
2 2 2 2( )x yV V V a 0 00 ( ) ( ) ...m U x U x
0x x
0 { ( )} xmx U x V
So for small we get SHM with 2 2
2
1 1 1 ( )
2roll x
IE m h x V mgh x
ma
00
( )U xk
m m
Conclusion:
You can model motion of a mass at the end of a
spring (1D motion) with a ball rolling in a vertical
plane if
1)the shape of the hill matches the potential, and
2) if you “adjust” the mass and
3) if the derivatives of the hill are “small”
Likewise for 2D(that is, when we want to model near circular 2D motion in a plane we can use near-circular motion on a Spandex)…WHY?
12
22
2 21 / ( )
22D LE mV mU
Diff. wrt time, assumeR
0 0
2 3 2 40 0
0 ( ) ( )
/ ( ) 3 / ( ) ...
m U R U R
L mR L mR
Again, SHM, constant terms give orbital frequency,
coefficient of gives frequency of small oscillations about orbit,
2 40 0
2
( ) 3 / ( )D oscillations
U R L mRk
m m
2 3 2 20 0 0 0 0 0( ) ( ) / / ( ) , .orbitalL mR U R R U R m T R U R Kepler etc
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford
First, let’s look at the planar case
Rolling adds more complications, but when rolling in a horizontal circle we have something
similar, but with a few new terms due to the rolling constraint
leading to,
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 13
2 2 2 2 2
2
2
2 2
2
1 ( / ) (1 ) ( / (2 )
(
) 1 (1 ) / ( ) (2
/(1 )( )
1/ )
rolling
z z
LE m I a V h mgh I h ma
Lh mh a
m
I a ah
20 0 2
cos( )/ 1
cos( )cos( )orbital
IR gh
ma
20 0( ) /orbitalR U R m
instead of Kepler’s Law
• Forhave
or• So if h(R) is power law,
yielding Kepler’s law analog
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 14
20 0 2
cos( )/ 1
cos( )cos( )orbital
IR gh
ma
2
0 0orbitalR gh
22
2
21
( )
T I
R ma gh R
1( )h R A R
2
2 2
21 =constant
R I
T ma gA
Effect of rolling on orbits
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 15
• Forhave
or• So if h(R) is logarithmic,
yielding
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 16
20 0 2
cos( )/ 1
cos( )cos( )orbital
IR gh
ma
20 0orbitalR gh
22
2
21
( )
T I
R ma gh R
( ) /h R A R
2constant
RV
T
Conclusion:
A wire of mass M (or any cigar-shaped matter
distribution, from far away, but not too far) has a
constant velocity profile…hmm…
Returning to the question of what is the pre-stretched Spandex vesion of Kepler’s Law
What if not going in a circle?
• For cones, the oscillations about near circular motion satisfy
• Can also derive neat analytical expression for “scattering angle” for cones…
• Spandex is more complicated…
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 17
22 2 2 3/2
02 2
(1 )3 1 2 ( / ) / (1 )rolling oscillations z
I h Ia R h h
ma ma
21 sin ( ) / B
Another video, ball in cone
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 18
Moving in a cone---exp. vs theory for near circular orbits
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 19
exp 0.97orbitT s
exp 0.72devT s
exp 6.48 .2 /rad s
exp 8.73 .4 /rad s
8.96 .4 /theory rad s
Two comments1) Should imperfect models, like Spandex and cones be used to convey ideas about gravity, general relativity?•Yup,(Imperfect models are better than “perfect” ones (consider “full-scale” maps!))
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 20
2) Recall that to get logarithmic potential
that is like real gravity for wire-shaped mass distributions, we have to stretch the Spandex taut and then add a heavy mass. Why is
that? …Why do you have to stretch the Spandex
for it to model the real gravity?
Was real gravity pre-stretched?
Thanks to
• My students, especially Michael Walker, Tony Mondragon, Dorothy Coates, Darren Slaughter, Brad Boyd, Kristen Russell, Matt Creighton, Michael Williams, Chris Gresham, Randall Gauthier.
• Society of Physics Students (SPS) interns Melissa Hoffmann and Meredith Woy
• Aaron Schuetz, Susan White,• SPS staff, AIP, APS, AAPT, NSF, NASA, and • You!
04/22/23 Gulf Coast Gravity Meeting, Oxford 21