# Naked Science Forum

## Non Life Sciences => Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology => Topic started by: jeffreyH on 21/02/2014 13:06:09

Title: Is this a reasonable representation of gravitational feedback?
Post by: jeffreyH on 21/02/2014 13:06:09
I have calculated the gravitational feedback of 99 earths side by side and each touching at the surface much like a string of beads arrangement. The graph shows the increase in gravitation through the chain of earth masses from one end to the other.
Title: Re: Is this a reasonable representation of gravitational feedback?
Post by: RD on 21/02/2014 13:37:53
Surely in the middle of the chain the the gravitational force from each half would cancel each other out,
like at L1 ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point#L1
Title: Re: Is this a reasonable representation of gravitational feedback?
Post by: jeffreyH on 21/02/2014 14:23:32
Surely in the middle of the chain the the gravitational force from each half would cancel each other out,
like at L1 ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point#L1

Yes that would be a valid observation if I were modelling the field in both directions. This is a simplified unidirectional representation. I could plot a two way feedback but that would not be my original intention. This may sound like a strange way of viewing this but I have my reasons for doing so at this point in time. Look at it as if each earth is added one at a time and we measure g as we go along the line.
Title: Re: Is this a reasonable representation of gravitational feedback?
Post by: jeffreyH on 22/02/2014 22:41:25
Taking into account the gravitational cancellation we now have the following. Each point is a measurement of g at the point where one earth touches the next at the surface. The yellow plot shows g at each point after cancellation. If combined with the model for escape velocity from the centre of a planet it is assumed that the yellow plot would then resemble a wave equation with the amplitude varying away from the combined centre of gravity. This assumption of course may be wrong.