/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.1099583]

hey /sci/ how does gravity effect things that are partially in the "gravity well" of a planet and partially outside of it.
For example, if I were to attach a string (or the base of a tower for that matter) to earth and carry the other end all the way out into space, what would happen to it?

pic not really related.

[Anonymous No.1099604]

My apologies, forgot a question mark at the end of my first sentence.

[Anonymous No.1099608]

>"gravity well"
>outside

[Anonymous No.1099617]

[Anonymous No.1099624]

In the case of the string, it would wrap around the Earth. In the case of the tower (assuming zero mass for simplicity) the penthouse suite would be moving reallyfuckingfast meters per second.

[Anonymous No.1099641]

>>1099617
>>1099608
Okay, so I'm not a fucking physics major. Instead of being self-righteous cunts you could inform me or take the basic idea behind my question and give me an answer. Despite my terminology it is still very easy to tell what I am asking. However, if you would prefer to flaunt acquired knowledge over legitimate intelligence then you can fuck off and I'll delete the thread.

[Anonymous No.1099657]

>>1099641
Gravity has no maximum range.
You can't be outside somethings gravity well.

[Anonymous No.1099659]

>>1099624
Hmm.
This is the picture that inspired my question, would structures that would normally be structurally improbable be possible if half of building was out in space?

[Anonymous No.1099666]

>>1099657
So currently I am not outside of the gravitational pull of (just an example) the Andromeda galaxy? This implies that the gravity of my mass is acting upon things countless light years away.

[Anonymous No.1099676]

>>1099666
Yes. Every object in the universe is exerting a gravitational force upon every other object in the universe. There is a delay though. Gravity travels at the speed of light.

[Anonymous No.1099677]

Y'all don't know about my space elevator.

[Anonymous No.1099678]

You can find the gravitational force on the string by dividing the string up into parts and applying the inverse square law to each part. To get an exact distance you can put in the inverse square law, you have to make the parts infinitesimally small; thus, you will end up doing an integral to compute the answer.

[снайпер No.1099681]

>>1099659
No. Just because they're in a vacuum does not mean they are magically unaffected by gravity.

[Anonymous No.1099687]

Gravitational pull has no limit to distance, but it decreases exponentially the further you are from an object. Generally it gets so small that it's negligible when compared to other things (like the Earth, Moon, and Sun).

[Anonymous No.1099700]

Is this one of those "there is no gravity in space" type threads?

[Anonymous No.1099702]

>>1099681
well of course not, however it does seem like the force put upon it would become less the farther away from the planet it was.
>>1099676
Then why is the universe drifting apart as apposed to moving together?

>>1099676

[Anonymous No.1099704]

>>1099659
I guess you're talking about structures that are "top-heavy." As you increase the height, it becomes more top-heavy, but at the same time the force of gravity on the top part decreases. I'm guessing it depends on various factors.

[Anonymous No.1099710]

>>1099659
The only problems I could see with such a tower would be centripetal force and torque. Gravity is almost entirely unimportant.

[Anonymous No.1099709]

>>1099702
Because of antimatter

[Anonymous No.1099720]

>>1099704
Samefag, I'm guessing that merely increasing the height decreases stability, but increasing all dimensions increases stability.

[Anonymous No.1099728]

I greatly appreciate all the people who actually answered or tried to answer my question.

[Anonymous No.1099742]

g=k*m1*m2/r^2
/thread

[Anonymous No.1099757]

>>1099742
who the fuck uses k?
Its G

[Anonymous No.1099789]

Omg I'm seriously crying from laughter.

[Anonymous No.1099904]

>>1099702
> Then why is the universe drifting apart as apposed to moving together?
Because of inertia and because there is a mysterious thing called dark energy which causes an antigravitational effect.

>>1099709
There isn't much antimatter in the universe, and it would be very surprising if antimatter didn't attract other objects gravitationally just like matter does.

[Anonymous No.1099932]

>>1099702
>well of course not, however it does seem like the force put upon it would become less the farther away from the planet it was.

The gravitational force of a sphere on an object is the same as that of a point of the same mass at the center of the sphere. Look at those buildings and ask yourself whether the distance between the top and bottom of the building really makes that much of a difference in their respective differences from the center of the planet.

[Anonymous No.1099933]

>>1099904
>There isn't much antimatter in the universe
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.1100089]

>>1099904
Isn't there over 90% more estimated dark mater than regular matter in the universe?

[Anonymous No.1100099]

>>1100089
Dark matter is not the same thing as antimatter.

[rec & play !!ZeLOSlAhY6W No.1100104]

>>1099904 it would be surprising if

It would be absolutely shocking since we already know perfectly well that antimatter behaves as matter with respect to gravity.

[rec & play !!ZeLOSlAhY6W No.1100113]

BTW sorry about the assholes laughing at you, OP. It's a perfectly reasonable question.

[kramerr No.1100120]

Outside of a gravity well.

HAHAHAHAHA

[rec & play !!ZeLOSlAhY6W No.1100122]

>>1099933
Speak not of that which you do not know. Laugh not, either.

[Anonymous No.1100137]

Gravity's speed is not known. Its definitely greater than c though.

[Anonymous No.1100155]

>>1100122

[Anonymous No.1100158]

>>1100137
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_gravity