In a ball with random thread/strings, how does the density of threads/strings change with radius?Does increasing the density of a solution decrease the rate of temperature change?How does the density of states for black-body radiation change with geometry?How does increasing the tension on a string affect the density?How do you derive the formula of density of mixed liquids with the same mass?Mass density of a cylinder increasing with the square of the radiusDoes increasing the tension on a string also increase the densityMeasuring air density - where is my huge error coming from?Does the average density of a ball affect its bounce height?How does surface tension change with density?Does the density parameter change over time?

What is the difference between "behavior" and "behaviour"?

A particular customize with green line and letters for subfloat

Is there a korbon needed for conversion?

Applicability of Single Responsibility Principle

How do I extract a value from a time formatted value in excel?

Crossing the line between justified force and brutality

What does "I’d sit this one out, Cap," imply or mean in the context?

How do I rename a Linux host without needing to reboot for the rename to take effect?

Why are there no referendums in the US?

Why not increase contact surface when reentering the atmosphere?

How did Doctor Strange see the winning outcome in Avengers: Infinity War?

Purchasing a ticket for someone else in another country?

Is `x >> pure y` equivalent to `liftM (const y) x`

Avoiding estate tax by giving multiple gifts

Anatomically Correct Strange Women In Ponds Distributing Swords

How did Arya survive the stabbing?

Large drywall patch supports

How do I find the solutions of the following equation?

Trouble understanding the speech of overseas colleagues

Is oxalic acid dihydrate considered a primary acid standard in analytical chemistry?

Type int? vs type int

Sort a list by elements of another list

Is it appropriate to ask a job candidate if we can record their interview?

Lay out the Carpet



In a ball with random thread/strings, how does the density of threads/strings change with radius?


Does increasing the density of a solution decrease the rate of temperature change?How does the density of states for black-body radiation change with geometry?How does increasing the tension on a string affect the density?How do you derive the formula of density of mixed liquids with the same mass?Mass density of a cylinder increasing with the square of the radiusDoes increasing the tension on a string also increase the densityMeasuring air density - where is my huge error coming from?Does the average density of a ball affect its bounce height?How does surface tension change with density?Does the density parameter change over time?













8












$begingroup$


A large plastic ball full of holes is given. (So the holes are in a plastic shell.) Straight threads connect these holes randomly, by passing through the interior of the ball/shell.



For a big ball or shell, say a meter in size, with thousands of holes, this makes (1/2 times) thousands of straight threads inside it. (Each hole has the diameter of the thread, so that each hole can only have one string passing through it.)



Now the question: Inside the ball/shell (assumed to be large), is the density of the random threads homogeneous, or does it depend on the radius?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Do you mean holes in a spherical shell? Can a string go from hole 1 to hole 2 and another one from hole 1 to hole 3? On other words, is more than one string per hole allowed?
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    I see you added the cosmology tag. Does this model have anything to do with cosmic strings?
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday







  • 4




    $begingroup$
    I think the answer will depend on how you choose your random placement of threads. See Bertrand paradox for a continuous 2D example of what I mean.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruslan
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Ruslan: you have 10,000 holes, say. When you put the thread through a hole you choose a random empty hole to connect it to. There really isn't any ambiguity about this probability distribution.
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Ruslan The Bertrand paradox applies to randomly selecting an element from an infinite set. With a finite set, you can assign each element the same, finite, probability. With an infinite set, you can't assign elements the same finite probability, so you have to have some notion of "measure", and there paradox comes in when there is more than one reasonable measure. There are a finite number of holes, so Bertrand's paradox doesn't apply to choosing the holes for a string.
    $endgroup$
    – Acccumulation
    yesterday















8












$begingroup$


A large plastic ball full of holes is given. (So the holes are in a plastic shell.) Straight threads connect these holes randomly, by passing through the interior of the ball/shell.



For a big ball or shell, say a meter in size, with thousands of holes, this makes (1/2 times) thousands of straight threads inside it. (Each hole has the diameter of the thread, so that each hole can only have one string passing through it.)



Now the question: Inside the ball/shell (assumed to be large), is the density of the random threads homogeneous, or does it depend on the radius?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Do you mean holes in a spherical shell? Can a string go from hole 1 to hole 2 and another one from hole 1 to hole 3? On other words, is more than one string per hole allowed?
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    I see you added the cosmology tag. Does this model have anything to do with cosmic strings?
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday







  • 4




    $begingroup$
    I think the answer will depend on how you choose your random placement of threads. See Bertrand paradox for a continuous 2D example of what I mean.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruslan
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Ruslan: you have 10,000 holes, say. When you put the thread through a hole you choose a random empty hole to connect it to. There really isn't any ambiguity about this probability distribution.
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Ruslan The Bertrand paradox applies to randomly selecting an element from an infinite set. With a finite set, you can assign each element the same, finite, probability. With an infinite set, you can't assign elements the same finite probability, so you have to have some notion of "measure", and there paradox comes in when there is more than one reasonable measure. There are a finite number of holes, so Bertrand's paradox doesn't apply to choosing the holes for a string.
    $endgroup$
    – Acccumulation
    yesterday













8












8








8


4



$begingroup$


A large plastic ball full of holes is given. (So the holes are in a plastic shell.) Straight threads connect these holes randomly, by passing through the interior of the ball/shell.



For a big ball or shell, say a meter in size, with thousands of holes, this makes (1/2 times) thousands of straight threads inside it. (Each hole has the diameter of the thread, so that each hole can only have one string passing through it.)



Now the question: Inside the ball/shell (assumed to be large), is the density of the random threads homogeneous, or does it depend on the radius?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




A large plastic ball full of holes is given. (So the holes are in a plastic shell.) Straight threads connect these holes randomly, by passing through the interior of the ball/shell.



For a big ball or shell, say a meter in size, with thousands of holes, this makes (1/2 times) thousands of straight threads inside it. (Each hole has the diameter of the thread, so that each hole can only have one string passing through it.)



Now the question: Inside the ball/shell (assumed to be large), is the density of the random threads homogeneous, or does it depend on the radius?







homework-and-exercises geometry density string






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 21 hours ago







frauke

















asked yesterday









fraukefrauke

464




464











  • $begingroup$
    Do you mean holes in a spherical shell? Can a string go from hole 1 to hole 2 and another one from hole 1 to hole 3? On other words, is more than one string per hole allowed?
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    I see you added the cosmology tag. Does this model have anything to do with cosmic strings?
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday







  • 4




    $begingroup$
    I think the answer will depend on how you choose your random placement of threads. See Bertrand paradox for a continuous 2D example of what I mean.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruslan
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Ruslan: you have 10,000 holes, say. When you put the thread through a hole you choose a random empty hole to connect it to. There really isn't any ambiguity about this probability distribution.
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Ruslan The Bertrand paradox applies to randomly selecting an element from an infinite set. With a finite set, you can assign each element the same, finite, probability. With an infinite set, you can't assign elements the same finite probability, so you have to have some notion of "measure", and there paradox comes in when there is more than one reasonable measure. There are a finite number of holes, so Bertrand's paradox doesn't apply to choosing the holes for a string.
    $endgroup$
    – Acccumulation
    yesterday
















  • $begingroup$
    Do you mean holes in a spherical shell? Can a string go from hole 1 to hole 2 and another one from hole 1 to hole 3? On other words, is more than one string per hole allowed?
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    I see you added the cosmology tag. Does this model have anything to do with cosmic strings?
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday







  • 4




    $begingroup$
    I think the answer will depend on how you choose your random placement of threads. See Bertrand paradox for a continuous 2D example of what I mean.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruslan
    yesterday






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Ruslan: you have 10,000 holes, say. When you put the thread through a hole you choose a random empty hole to connect it to. There really isn't any ambiguity about this probability distribution.
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Ruslan The Bertrand paradox applies to randomly selecting an element from an infinite set. With a finite set, you can assign each element the same, finite, probability. With an infinite set, you can't assign elements the same finite probability, so you have to have some notion of "measure", and there paradox comes in when there is more than one reasonable measure. There are a finite number of holes, so Bertrand's paradox doesn't apply to choosing the holes for a string.
    $endgroup$
    – Acccumulation
    yesterday















$begingroup$
Do you mean holes in a spherical shell? Can a string go from hole 1 to hole 2 and another one from hole 1 to hole 3? On other words, is more than one string per hole allowed?
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
yesterday




$begingroup$
Do you mean holes in a spherical shell? Can a string go from hole 1 to hole 2 and another one from hole 1 to hole 3? On other words, is more than one string per hole allowed?
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
yesterday












$begingroup$
I see you added the cosmology tag. Does this model have anything to do with cosmic strings?
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
yesterday





$begingroup$
I see you added the cosmology tag. Does this model have anything to do with cosmic strings?
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
yesterday





4




4




$begingroup$
I think the answer will depend on how you choose your random placement of threads. See Bertrand paradox for a continuous 2D example of what I mean.
$endgroup$
– Ruslan
yesterday




$begingroup$
I think the answer will depend on how you choose your random placement of threads. See Bertrand paradox for a continuous 2D example of what I mean.
$endgroup$
– Ruslan
yesterday




1




1




$begingroup$
@Ruslan: you have 10,000 holes, say. When you put the thread through a hole you choose a random empty hole to connect it to. There really isn't any ambiguity about this probability distribution.
$endgroup$
– Peter Shor
yesterday





$begingroup$
@Ruslan: you have 10,000 holes, say. When you put the thread through a hole you choose a random empty hole to connect it to. There really isn't any ambiguity about this probability distribution.
$endgroup$
– Peter Shor
yesterday





1




1




$begingroup$
@Ruslan The Bertrand paradox applies to randomly selecting an element from an infinite set. With a finite set, you can assign each element the same, finite, probability. With an infinite set, you can't assign elements the same finite probability, so you have to have some notion of "measure", and there paradox comes in when there is more than one reasonable measure. There are a finite number of holes, so Bertrand's paradox doesn't apply to choosing the holes for a string.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
yesterday




$begingroup$
@Ruslan The Bertrand paradox applies to randomly selecting an element from an infinite set. With a finite set, you can assign each element the same, finite, probability. With an infinite set, you can't assign elements the same finite probability, so you have to have some notion of "measure", and there paradox comes in when there is more than one reasonable measure. There are a finite number of holes, so Bertrand's paradox doesn't apply to choosing the holes for a string.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
yesterday










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















8












$begingroup$

I believe the density is homogeneous throughout the ball.



I did a numerical simulation of this in Mathematica. I assumed the sphere had radius 1 and generated 100,000 pairs of random points on it, each pair to be connected with string. Then I analyzed this set of random strings to see how much total mass (i.e., length of string) lay between $r$ and $r+dr$ in various spherical shells with radii (0.1, 0.2, …, 0.9), using a bit of geometry. Then I divided by the square of the radius of the spherical shell to get the volume density and plotted it. The 9 points lay almost on a horizontal line:



enter image description here



The horizonal axis is the radial coordinate and the vertical axis is the mass density.



ADDENDUM



Here is an analytic proof that the density is homogeneous, based on @Gec's answer. I agree with his approach but not his former result.



Take the sphere to have unit radius and the strings to have unit linear mass density so that the mass of a small segment is just the length of that segment.



As Gec points out, a string can be characterized by the angle it subtends, which I'm going to call $theta$. A string has a minimum radial distance of $cos(theta/2)equiv a$ and a length of $2sin(theta/2)=2sqrt1-a^2$.



Introduce a linear coordinate $s$ along the string, measured from its midpoint. Then one has $a^2+s^2=r^2$ so



$$s=sqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2).$$



Differentiating with respect to $r$, we find



$$ds=fracr,drsqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)=fracr,drsqrtr^2-a^2.$$



This tells us that the mass of this string that lies within a spherical shell between $r$ and $r+dr$ is



$$dm=frac2r,drsqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)=frac2r,drsqrtr^2-a^2.$$



(The string passes through the shell on both sides of its center.)



We can check that this is correct by integrating it over $r$ from $a$ to $1$:



$$m=2int_a^1fracr,drsqrtr^2-a^2=2sqrt1-a^2,$$



which agrees with the length of the string.



Now we need to integrate over strings between random points on a sphere.



As Gec pointed out, the spherical symmetry means that we can consider just strings with one endpoint at the north pole, and the other end at polar angle $theta$ and azimuthal angle $phi$. To randomly average a quantity $f$ over the randomly placed other end, we compute $langle f rangle=frac14piiint f,sintheta,dtheta,dphi$. By azimuthal symmetry, this simplifies to $frac12int f,sintheta,dtheta$.



To compute the averaged mass $dM$ in a spherical shell between $r$ and $r+dr$, we integrate $dm$ over $theta$, but only between $2cos^-1r$ and $pi$. For smaller angles, the string would not pass through the shell and thus would not contribute any mass. So



$$fracdMdr=int_2cos^-1r^pi fracrsintheta,dthetasqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)$$



The substitution $u=cos(theta/2)$ simplifies this integral to



$$fracdMdr=4rint_0^rfracu,dusqrtr^2-u^2=4r^2.$$.



To get the volume mass density $rho=dM/dV$, we divide by the area of the spherical shell, $4pi r^2$, to get a homogeneous density of



$$rho=frac1pi.$$



My numerical simulation gave $2$ rather than $1/pi$ because (1) I didn’t multiply by 2 to take into account that a string passes through a shell on both sides of its midpoint, and (2) at the end I divided by $r^2$ rather than $4pi r^2$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Awesome - even though I expected something different, namely a decrease with radius.
    $endgroup$
    – frauke
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Well, the question is whether I did the geometry right. But it seems unlikely that if I got it wrong the density would have turned out constant. The calculation was nontrivial.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    I first calculated the midpoint of the string. Call its distance from the center $a$. That string only contributes mass to shells at $r>a$. Then I calculated the points where the string passed through radius $r$ and $r+dr$ and took the distance between them. I had found analytically that this was $r,dr/sqrtr^2-a^2$. So this is proportional to the mass $dm$ of this string in this shell.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    So you connected random points on the sphere? But what if you use a "random midpoint" method (from Bertrand paradox): choose a random point inside the ball, and then generate a chord with this point being the midpoint of the chord. I think you'll get a different result.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruslan
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    Once you figure out how much mass lies between $r$ and $r+dr$, don't you have to divide by the radius squared to get the volume density?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday



















3












$begingroup$

Added. Now, I think that G. Smith gave the right answer to the initial question. And I was solving a different problem. My former solution implies that we chose any thread with equal probability and then uniformly chose the point of this thread. This procedure is not equivalent to the finding of mass distribution. To find the distribution of mass we should choose threads with probabilities proportional to their length. Just because of the lengthy thread contains more mass. Doing like this one obtains a mass distribution with constant density.



Former solution. I obtained the following expression for the density of "matter" inside the sphere of radius 1
$$
rho(r) = fracArlogleft(fracsqrt2(1+r)sqrt+sqrt2cos(varphi(r)/2)right).
$$

Here $A$ is constant and $varphi(r) = 2arcsin(r)$. The valiue of this density at $r=0$ is equal to $A$, and it diverges as $r$ tends to 1.



Upd. This expression is obtained in the following way.
For any pair of holes let's draw z-axis through one of them and the center of sphere. Then a position of the second is defined by a polar angle $varphiin[0,pi]$. The angle is random
and the corresponding pdf is $w_1(varphi)=sin(varphi)/2$. Uniform distribution of "matter" along the line connecting two holes leads to the following distribution of radius:
$$
w_2(r|varphi) = fracrcos(varphi/2)sqrtr^2-sin^2(varphi/2),
$$

where $rin[sin(varphi/2),1]$. The minimal value of radius along the line is equal to $sin(varphi/2)$, hence the definition of $varphi(r)$. Averaging with respect to angles gives the radius pdf:
$$
w_3(r) = int_0^varphi(r) w_1(varphi)w_2(r|varphi)dvarphi .
$$

And the density of "matter" is proportional to $w_3(r)/r^2$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This answer could be simplified greatly by using the formula $cos(2arcsin(x)) = 1-2x^2,.$
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    I think $w_2$ is wrong. If I integrate it over $r$ from $sin(varphi/2)$ to 1, which should give the total mass of a string with polar angle $varphi$, I get 1. But the strings should have different masses. I’m also totally confused because the minimal radius should be $cosvarphi/2$, not $sinvarphi/2$.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    I think $w_2=r/sqrtr^2-cos^2(varphi/2)$.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    @G. Smith, I think I was solving a different problem. And you gave the right answer to the initial question.
    $endgroup$
    – Gec
    yesterday


















0












$begingroup$

While the number of strings passing nearby the shell is higher than that of the strings passing through the center, also the constant radius surfaces near the shell are larger than those near the center of the sphere.



We can define the string density $rho $ through



$$4pi r^2rho(r)= N (r) $$



where $N (r) $ is the number of times that the strings intersect the constant radius $r$ surface.



Note that, assuming the holes follow a homogeneous distribution, in the limit of large number of holes you are just connecting random points of the sphere with lines that cross the sphere.



Fixed a point from which the line is drawn, you have equal probability of connecting it to any other point of the sphere.



The line (string) will pass through the center only if the opposite point is chosen.



Conversely every line will pass through the sphere surface and almost every line will pass at a slightly smaller radius.



You can compute the number of lines of a certain length $L $ that can be drawn from a chosen point; even better you can express this using the angle formed by the two points connected and the center of the sphere:
$$L=2Rsintheta;,qquad
N_L= 2pi R sin 2theta$$

The segments corresponding to an angle $theta$ will contribute to the density for radiai in the range $[Rcostheta, R]$ with 2 points each except in the case of the minimum radius value (here the string passes only once).
Now $N (r) $ will be proportional to



$$ int_theta*^pi/2 2pi R sin (2theta)dtheta $$



where $costheta*=frac rR$.
The proportionality constant is basically the number of the endpoints since you integrate their distribution on the $R $ shell (you also have a factor 2 because each string is counted twice almost everywhere and a factor 1/2 to avoid the overcounting when integrating over endpoints).



The integral gives $$2pi R left(frac rRright)^2$$



so that when you compute $rho (r)$ you indeed get a term which is independent from $r $.



If we were to stop here, the density would be uniform.



One could think that we still need to remove the overcounting of pieces of string in the minimum radius each segment reaches:
do we have to subtract from $N (r)$ one counting of the intersection at minimum radius, i.e. the quantity $$2pi R sin (2theta*)$$



This would give a part which is dependent on $r $ in the distribution: $$rho (r)sim const+frac sqrt1-(r/R)^2r$$



The truth is that the term must be subtracted into the integral of $N (r) $ and there gives zero contribute, since its a modification on a set of zero measure.



So in conclusion there is no term to be subtracted and the density is indeed constant.
It would be nice to see if there are other endpoints distributions that are mimicked by the string density..






share|cite|improve this answer










New contributor




france95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    You seem to have neglected the fact that, while a shell of radius $r$ around the midpoint of the sphere will indeed have less threads passing through it as $r$ decreases, it also has correspondingly less area. A priori, without calculating the expected number of threads passing through the shell, it doesn't seem obvious which effect will dominate -- and, in fact, G. Smith's numerical results seem to suggest that they might cancel out exactly!
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Yeah @Ilmari Karonen you are right! Indeed the effect precisely cancels the radial growth. I will soon add the explicit computations
    $endgroup$
    – france95
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    Why not simplify $sin(arccos(x))$?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    @Peter Shor yes, but more importantly there is no need to subtract that term I think. (See how I edited)
    $endgroup$
    – france95
    yesterday










Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f468700%2fin-a-ball-with-random-thread-strings-how-does-the-density-of-threads-strings-ch%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









8












$begingroup$

I believe the density is homogeneous throughout the ball.



I did a numerical simulation of this in Mathematica. I assumed the sphere had radius 1 and generated 100,000 pairs of random points on it, each pair to be connected with string. Then I analyzed this set of random strings to see how much total mass (i.e., length of string) lay between $r$ and $r+dr$ in various spherical shells with radii (0.1, 0.2, …, 0.9), using a bit of geometry. Then I divided by the square of the radius of the spherical shell to get the volume density and plotted it. The 9 points lay almost on a horizontal line:



enter image description here



The horizonal axis is the radial coordinate and the vertical axis is the mass density.



ADDENDUM



Here is an analytic proof that the density is homogeneous, based on @Gec's answer. I agree with his approach but not his former result.



Take the sphere to have unit radius and the strings to have unit linear mass density so that the mass of a small segment is just the length of that segment.



As Gec points out, a string can be characterized by the angle it subtends, which I'm going to call $theta$. A string has a minimum radial distance of $cos(theta/2)equiv a$ and a length of $2sin(theta/2)=2sqrt1-a^2$.



Introduce a linear coordinate $s$ along the string, measured from its midpoint. Then one has $a^2+s^2=r^2$ so



$$s=sqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2).$$



Differentiating with respect to $r$, we find



$$ds=fracr,drsqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)=fracr,drsqrtr^2-a^2.$$



This tells us that the mass of this string that lies within a spherical shell between $r$ and $r+dr$ is



$$dm=frac2r,drsqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)=frac2r,drsqrtr^2-a^2.$$



(The string passes through the shell on both sides of its center.)



We can check that this is correct by integrating it over $r$ from $a$ to $1$:



$$m=2int_a^1fracr,drsqrtr^2-a^2=2sqrt1-a^2,$$



which agrees with the length of the string.



Now we need to integrate over strings between random points on a sphere.



As Gec pointed out, the spherical symmetry means that we can consider just strings with one endpoint at the north pole, and the other end at polar angle $theta$ and azimuthal angle $phi$. To randomly average a quantity $f$ over the randomly placed other end, we compute $langle f rangle=frac14piiint f,sintheta,dtheta,dphi$. By azimuthal symmetry, this simplifies to $frac12int f,sintheta,dtheta$.



To compute the averaged mass $dM$ in a spherical shell between $r$ and $r+dr$, we integrate $dm$ over $theta$, but only between $2cos^-1r$ and $pi$. For smaller angles, the string would not pass through the shell and thus would not contribute any mass. So



$$fracdMdr=int_2cos^-1r^pi fracrsintheta,dthetasqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)$$



The substitution $u=cos(theta/2)$ simplifies this integral to



$$fracdMdr=4rint_0^rfracu,dusqrtr^2-u^2=4r^2.$$.



To get the volume mass density $rho=dM/dV$, we divide by the area of the spherical shell, $4pi r^2$, to get a homogeneous density of



$$rho=frac1pi.$$



My numerical simulation gave $2$ rather than $1/pi$ because (1) I didn’t multiply by 2 to take into account that a string passes through a shell on both sides of its midpoint, and (2) at the end I divided by $r^2$ rather than $4pi r^2$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Awesome - even though I expected something different, namely a decrease with radius.
    $endgroup$
    – frauke
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Well, the question is whether I did the geometry right. But it seems unlikely that if I got it wrong the density would have turned out constant. The calculation was nontrivial.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    I first calculated the midpoint of the string. Call its distance from the center $a$. That string only contributes mass to shells at $r>a$. Then I calculated the points where the string passed through radius $r$ and $r+dr$ and took the distance between them. I had found analytically that this was $r,dr/sqrtr^2-a^2$. So this is proportional to the mass $dm$ of this string in this shell.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    So you connected random points on the sphere? But what if you use a "random midpoint" method (from Bertrand paradox): choose a random point inside the ball, and then generate a chord with this point being the midpoint of the chord. I think you'll get a different result.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruslan
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    Once you figure out how much mass lies between $r$ and $r+dr$, don't you have to divide by the radius squared to get the volume density?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday
















8












$begingroup$

I believe the density is homogeneous throughout the ball.



I did a numerical simulation of this in Mathematica. I assumed the sphere had radius 1 and generated 100,000 pairs of random points on it, each pair to be connected with string. Then I analyzed this set of random strings to see how much total mass (i.e., length of string) lay between $r$ and $r+dr$ in various spherical shells with radii (0.1, 0.2, …, 0.9), using a bit of geometry. Then I divided by the square of the radius of the spherical shell to get the volume density and plotted it. The 9 points lay almost on a horizontal line:



enter image description here



The horizonal axis is the radial coordinate and the vertical axis is the mass density.



ADDENDUM



Here is an analytic proof that the density is homogeneous, based on @Gec's answer. I agree with his approach but not his former result.



Take the sphere to have unit radius and the strings to have unit linear mass density so that the mass of a small segment is just the length of that segment.



As Gec points out, a string can be characterized by the angle it subtends, which I'm going to call $theta$. A string has a minimum radial distance of $cos(theta/2)equiv a$ and a length of $2sin(theta/2)=2sqrt1-a^2$.



Introduce a linear coordinate $s$ along the string, measured from its midpoint. Then one has $a^2+s^2=r^2$ so



$$s=sqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2).$$



Differentiating with respect to $r$, we find



$$ds=fracr,drsqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)=fracr,drsqrtr^2-a^2.$$



This tells us that the mass of this string that lies within a spherical shell between $r$ and $r+dr$ is



$$dm=frac2r,drsqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)=frac2r,drsqrtr^2-a^2.$$



(The string passes through the shell on both sides of its center.)



We can check that this is correct by integrating it over $r$ from $a$ to $1$:



$$m=2int_a^1fracr,drsqrtr^2-a^2=2sqrt1-a^2,$$



which agrees with the length of the string.



Now we need to integrate over strings between random points on a sphere.



As Gec pointed out, the spherical symmetry means that we can consider just strings with one endpoint at the north pole, and the other end at polar angle $theta$ and azimuthal angle $phi$. To randomly average a quantity $f$ over the randomly placed other end, we compute $langle f rangle=frac14piiint f,sintheta,dtheta,dphi$. By azimuthal symmetry, this simplifies to $frac12int f,sintheta,dtheta$.



To compute the averaged mass $dM$ in a spherical shell between $r$ and $r+dr$, we integrate $dm$ over $theta$, but only between $2cos^-1r$ and $pi$. For smaller angles, the string would not pass through the shell and thus would not contribute any mass. So



$$fracdMdr=int_2cos^-1r^pi fracrsintheta,dthetasqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)$$



The substitution $u=cos(theta/2)$ simplifies this integral to



$$fracdMdr=4rint_0^rfracu,dusqrtr^2-u^2=4r^2.$$.



To get the volume mass density $rho=dM/dV$, we divide by the area of the spherical shell, $4pi r^2$, to get a homogeneous density of



$$rho=frac1pi.$$



My numerical simulation gave $2$ rather than $1/pi$ because (1) I didn’t multiply by 2 to take into account that a string passes through a shell on both sides of its midpoint, and (2) at the end I divided by $r^2$ rather than $4pi r^2$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Awesome - even though I expected something different, namely a decrease with radius.
    $endgroup$
    – frauke
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Well, the question is whether I did the geometry right. But it seems unlikely that if I got it wrong the density would have turned out constant. The calculation was nontrivial.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    I first calculated the midpoint of the string. Call its distance from the center $a$. That string only contributes mass to shells at $r>a$. Then I calculated the points where the string passed through radius $r$ and $r+dr$ and took the distance between them. I had found analytically that this was $r,dr/sqrtr^2-a^2$. So this is proportional to the mass $dm$ of this string in this shell.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    So you connected random points on the sphere? But what if you use a "random midpoint" method (from Bertrand paradox): choose a random point inside the ball, and then generate a chord with this point being the midpoint of the chord. I think you'll get a different result.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruslan
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    Once you figure out how much mass lies between $r$ and $r+dr$, don't you have to divide by the radius squared to get the volume density?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday














8












8








8





$begingroup$

I believe the density is homogeneous throughout the ball.



I did a numerical simulation of this in Mathematica. I assumed the sphere had radius 1 and generated 100,000 pairs of random points on it, each pair to be connected with string. Then I analyzed this set of random strings to see how much total mass (i.e., length of string) lay between $r$ and $r+dr$ in various spherical shells with radii (0.1, 0.2, …, 0.9), using a bit of geometry. Then I divided by the square of the radius of the spherical shell to get the volume density and plotted it. The 9 points lay almost on a horizontal line:



enter image description here



The horizonal axis is the radial coordinate and the vertical axis is the mass density.



ADDENDUM



Here is an analytic proof that the density is homogeneous, based on @Gec's answer. I agree with his approach but not his former result.



Take the sphere to have unit radius and the strings to have unit linear mass density so that the mass of a small segment is just the length of that segment.



As Gec points out, a string can be characterized by the angle it subtends, which I'm going to call $theta$. A string has a minimum radial distance of $cos(theta/2)equiv a$ and a length of $2sin(theta/2)=2sqrt1-a^2$.



Introduce a linear coordinate $s$ along the string, measured from its midpoint. Then one has $a^2+s^2=r^2$ so



$$s=sqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2).$$



Differentiating with respect to $r$, we find



$$ds=fracr,drsqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)=fracr,drsqrtr^2-a^2.$$



This tells us that the mass of this string that lies within a spherical shell between $r$ and $r+dr$ is



$$dm=frac2r,drsqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)=frac2r,drsqrtr^2-a^2.$$



(The string passes through the shell on both sides of its center.)



We can check that this is correct by integrating it over $r$ from $a$ to $1$:



$$m=2int_a^1fracr,drsqrtr^2-a^2=2sqrt1-a^2,$$



which agrees with the length of the string.



Now we need to integrate over strings between random points on a sphere.



As Gec pointed out, the spherical symmetry means that we can consider just strings with one endpoint at the north pole, and the other end at polar angle $theta$ and azimuthal angle $phi$. To randomly average a quantity $f$ over the randomly placed other end, we compute $langle f rangle=frac14piiint f,sintheta,dtheta,dphi$. By azimuthal symmetry, this simplifies to $frac12int f,sintheta,dtheta$.



To compute the averaged mass $dM$ in a spherical shell between $r$ and $r+dr$, we integrate $dm$ over $theta$, but only between $2cos^-1r$ and $pi$. For smaller angles, the string would not pass through the shell and thus would not contribute any mass. So



$$fracdMdr=int_2cos^-1r^pi fracrsintheta,dthetasqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)$$



The substitution $u=cos(theta/2)$ simplifies this integral to



$$fracdMdr=4rint_0^rfracu,dusqrtr^2-u^2=4r^2.$$.



To get the volume mass density $rho=dM/dV$, we divide by the area of the spherical shell, $4pi r^2$, to get a homogeneous density of



$$rho=frac1pi.$$



My numerical simulation gave $2$ rather than $1/pi$ because (1) I didn’t multiply by 2 to take into account that a string passes through a shell on both sides of its midpoint, and (2) at the end I divided by $r^2$ rather than $4pi r^2$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



I believe the density is homogeneous throughout the ball.



I did a numerical simulation of this in Mathematica. I assumed the sphere had radius 1 and generated 100,000 pairs of random points on it, each pair to be connected with string. Then I analyzed this set of random strings to see how much total mass (i.e., length of string) lay between $r$ and $r+dr$ in various spherical shells with radii (0.1, 0.2, …, 0.9), using a bit of geometry. Then I divided by the square of the radius of the spherical shell to get the volume density and plotted it. The 9 points lay almost on a horizontal line:



enter image description here



The horizonal axis is the radial coordinate and the vertical axis is the mass density.



ADDENDUM



Here is an analytic proof that the density is homogeneous, based on @Gec's answer. I agree with his approach but not his former result.



Take the sphere to have unit radius and the strings to have unit linear mass density so that the mass of a small segment is just the length of that segment.



As Gec points out, a string can be characterized by the angle it subtends, which I'm going to call $theta$. A string has a minimum radial distance of $cos(theta/2)equiv a$ and a length of $2sin(theta/2)=2sqrt1-a^2$.



Introduce a linear coordinate $s$ along the string, measured from its midpoint. Then one has $a^2+s^2=r^2$ so



$$s=sqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2).$$



Differentiating with respect to $r$, we find



$$ds=fracr,drsqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)=fracr,drsqrtr^2-a^2.$$



This tells us that the mass of this string that lies within a spherical shell between $r$ and $r+dr$ is



$$dm=frac2r,drsqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)=frac2r,drsqrtr^2-a^2.$$



(The string passes through the shell on both sides of its center.)



We can check that this is correct by integrating it over $r$ from $a$ to $1$:



$$m=2int_a^1fracr,drsqrtr^2-a^2=2sqrt1-a^2,$$



which agrees with the length of the string.



Now we need to integrate over strings between random points on a sphere.



As Gec pointed out, the spherical symmetry means that we can consider just strings with one endpoint at the north pole, and the other end at polar angle $theta$ and azimuthal angle $phi$. To randomly average a quantity $f$ over the randomly placed other end, we compute $langle f rangle=frac14piiint f,sintheta,dtheta,dphi$. By azimuthal symmetry, this simplifies to $frac12int f,sintheta,dtheta$.



To compute the averaged mass $dM$ in a spherical shell between $r$ and $r+dr$, we integrate $dm$ over $theta$, but only between $2cos^-1r$ and $pi$. For smaller angles, the string would not pass through the shell and thus would not contribute any mass. So



$$fracdMdr=int_2cos^-1r^pi fracrsintheta,dthetasqrtr^2-cos^2(theta/2)$$



The substitution $u=cos(theta/2)$ simplifies this integral to



$$fracdMdr=4rint_0^rfracu,dusqrtr^2-u^2=4r^2.$$.



To get the volume mass density $rho=dM/dV$, we divide by the area of the spherical shell, $4pi r^2$, to get a homogeneous density of



$$rho=frac1pi.$$



My numerical simulation gave $2$ rather than $1/pi$ because (1) I didn’t multiply by 2 to take into account that a string passes through a shell on both sides of its midpoint, and (2) at the end I divided by $r^2$ rather than $4pi r^2$.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 8 hours ago

























answered yesterday









G. SmithG. Smith

9,93111428




9,93111428











  • $begingroup$
    Awesome - even though I expected something different, namely a decrease with radius.
    $endgroup$
    – frauke
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Well, the question is whether I did the geometry right. But it seems unlikely that if I got it wrong the density would have turned out constant. The calculation was nontrivial.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    I first calculated the midpoint of the string. Call its distance from the center $a$. That string only contributes mass to shells at $r>a$. Then I calculated the points where the string passed through radius $r$ and $r+dr$ and took the distance between them. I had found analytically that this was $r,dr/sqrtr^2-a^2$. So this is proportional to the mass $dm$ of this string in this shell.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    So you connected random points on the sphere? But what if you use a "random midpoint" method (from Bertrand paradox): choose a random point inside the ball, and then generate a chord with this point being the midpoint of the chord. I think you'll get a different result.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruslan
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    Once you figure out how much mass lies between $r$ and $r+dr$, don't you have to divide by the radius squared to get the volume density?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday

















  • $begingroup$
    Awesome - even though I expected something different, namely a decrease with radius.
    $endgroup$
    – frauke
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Well, the question is whether I did the geometry right. But it seems unlikely that if I got it wrong the density would have turned out constant. The calculation was nontrivial.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    I first calculated the midpoint of the string. Call its distance from the center $a$. That string only contributes mass to shells at $r>a$. Then I calculated the points where the string passed through radius $r$ and $r+dr$ and took the distance between them. I had found analytically that this was $r,dr/sqrtr^2-a^2$. So this is proportional to the mass $dm$ of this string in this shell.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    So you connected random points on the sphere? But what if you use a "random midpoint" method (from Bertrand paradox): choose a random point inside the ball, and then generate a chord with this point being the midpoint of the chord. I think you'll get a different result.
    $endgroup$
    – Ruslan
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    Once you figure out how much mass lies between $r$ and $r+dr$, don't you have to divide by the radius squared to get the volume density?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday
















$begingroup$
Awesome - even though I expected something different, namely a decrease with radius.
$endgroup$
– frauke
yesterday




$begingroup$
Awesome - even though I expected something different, namely a decrease with radius.
$endgroup$
– frauke
yesterday












$begingroup$
Well, the question is whether I did the geometry right. But it seems unlikely that if I got it wrong the density would have turned out constant. The calculation was nontrivial.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
yesterday





$begingroup$
Well, the question is whether I did the geometry right. But it seems unlikely that if I got it wrong the density would have turned out constant. The calculation was nontrivial.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
yesterday













$begingroup$
I first calculated the midpoint of the string. Call its distance from the center $a$. That string only contributes mass to shells at $r>a$. Then I calculated the points where the string passed through radius $r$ and $r+dr$ and took the distance between them. I had found analytically that this was $r,dr/sqrtr^2-a^2$. So this is proportional to the mass $dm$ of this string in this shell.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
yesterday





$begingroup$
I first calculated the midpoint of the string. Call its distance from the center $a$. That string only contributes mass to shells at $r>a$. Then I calculated the points where the string passed through radius $r$ and $r+dr$ and took the distance between them. I had found analytically that this was $r,dr/sqrtr^2-a^2$. So this is proportional to the mass $dm$ of this string in this shell.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
yesterday













$begingroup$
So you connected random points on the sphere? But what if you use a "random midpoint" method (from Bertrand paradox): choose a random point inside the ball, and then generate a chord with this point being the midpoint of the chord. I think you'll get a different result.
$endgroup$
– Ruslan
yesterday





$begingroup$
So you connected random points on the sphere? But what if you use a "random midpoint" method (from Bertrand paradox): choose a random point inside the ball, and then generate a chord with this point being the midpoint of the chord. I think you'll get a different result.
$endgroup$
– Ruslan
yesterday













$begingroup$
Once you figure out how much mass lies between $r$ and $r+dr$, don't you have to divide by the radius squared to get the volume density?
$endgroup$
– Peter Shor
yesterday





$begingroup$
Once you figure out how much mass lies between $r$ and $r+dr$, don't you have to divide by the radius squared to get the volume density?
$endgroup$
– Peter Shor
yesterday












3












$begingroup$

Added. Now, I think that G. Smith gave the right answer to the initial question. And I was solving a different problem. My former solution implies that we chose any thread with equal probability and then uniformly chose the point of this thread. This procedure is not equivalent to the finding of mass distribution. To find the distribution of mass we should choose threads with probabilities proportional to their length. Just because of the lengthy thread contains more mass. Doing like this one obtains a mass distribution with constant density.



Former solution. I obtained the following expression for the density of "matter" inside the sphere of radius 1
$$
rho(r) = fracArlogleft(fracsqrt2(1+r)sqrt+sqrt2cos(varphi(r)/2)right).
$$

Here $A$ is constant and $varphi(r) = 2arcsin(r)$. The valiue of this density at $r=0$ is equal to $A$, and it diverges as $r$ tends to 1.



Upd. This expression is obtained in the following way.
For any pair of holes let's draw z-axis through one of them and the center of sphere. Then a position of the second is defined by a polar angle $varphiin[0,pi]$. The angle is random
and the corresponding pdf is $w_1(varphi)=sin(varphi)/2$. Uniform distribution of "matter" along the line connecting two holes leads to the following distribution of radius:
$$
w_2(r|varphi) = fracrcos(varphi/2)sqrtr^2-sin^2(varphi/2),
$$

where $rin[sin(varphi/2),1]$. The minimal value of radius along the line is equal to $sin(varphi/2)$, hence the definition of $varphi(r)$. Averaging with respect to angles gives the radius pdf:
$$
w_3(r) = int_0^varphi(r) w_1(varphi)w_2(r|varphi)dvarphi .
$$

And the density of "matter" is proportional to $w_3(r)/r^2$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This answer could be simplified greatly by using the formula $cos(2arcsin(x)) = 1-2x^2,.$
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    I think $w_2$ is wrong. If I integrate it over $r$ from $sin(varphi/2)$ to 1, which should give the total mass of a string with polar angle $varphi$, I get 1. But the strings should have different masses. I’m also totally confused because the minimal radius should be $cosvarphi/2$, not $sinvarphi/2$.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    I think $w_2=r/sqrtr^2-cos^2(varphi/2)$.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    @G. Smith, I think I was solving a different problem. And you gave the right answer to the initial question.
    $endgroup$
    – Gec
    yesterday















3












$begingroup$

Added. Now, I think that G. Smith gave the right answer to the initial question. And I was solving a different problem. My former solution implies that we chose any thread with equal probability and then uniformly chose the point of this thread. This procedure is not equivalent to the finding of mass distribution. To find the distribution of mass we should choose threads with probabilities proportional to their length. Just because of the lengthy thread contains more mass. Doing like this one obtains a mass distribution with constant density.



Former solution. I obtained the following expression for the density of "matter" inside the sphere of radius 1
$$
rho(r) = fracArlogleft(fracsqrt2(1+r)sqrt+sqrt2cos(varphi(r)/2)right).
$$

Here $A$ is constant and $varphi(r) = 2arcsin(r)$. The valiue of this density at $r=0$ is equal to $A$, and it diverges as $r$ tends to 1.



Upd. This expression is obtained in the following way.
For any pair of holes let's draw z-axis through one of them and the center of sphere. Then a position of the second is defined by a polar angle $varphiin[0,pi]$. The angle is random
and the corresponding pdf is $w_1(varphi)=sin(varphi)/2$. Uniform distribution of "matter" along the line connecting two holes leads to the following distribution of radius:
$$
w_2(r|varphi) = fracrcos(varphi/2)sqrtr^2-sin^2(varphi/2),
$$

where $rin[sin(varphi/2),1]$. The minimal value of radius along the line is equal to $sin(varphi/2)$, hence the definition of $varphi(r)$. Averaging with respect to angles gives the radius pdf:
$$
w_3(r) = int_0^varphi(r) w_1(varphi)w_2(r|varphi)dvarphi .
$$

And the density of "matter" is proportional to $w_3(r)/r^2$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    This answer could be simplified greatly by using the formula $cos(2arcsin(x)) = 1-2x^2,.$
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    I think $w_2$ is wrong. If I integrate it over $r$ from $sin(varphi/2)$ to 1, which should give the total mass of a string with polar angle $varphi$, I get 1. But the strings should have different masses. I’m also totally confused because the minimal radius should be $cosvarphi/2$, not $sinvarphi/2$.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    I think $w_2=r/sqrtr^2-cos^2(varphi/2)$.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    @G. Smith, I think I was solving a different problem. And you gave the right answer to the initial question.
    $endgroup$
    – Gec
    yesterday













3












3








3





$begingroup$

Added. Now, I think that G. Smith gave the right answer to the initial question. And I was solving a different problem. My former solution implies that we chose any thread with equal probability and then uniformly chose the point of this thread. This procedure is not equivalent to the finding of mass distribution. To find the distribution of mass we should choose threads with probabilities proportional to their length. Just because of the lengthy thread contains more mass. Doing like this one obtains a mass distribution with constant density.



Former solution. I obtained the following expression for the density of "matter" inside the sphere of radius 1
$$
rho(r) = fracArlogleft(fracsqrt2(1+r)sqrt+sqrt2cos(varphi(r)/2)right).
$$

Here $A$ is constant and $varphi(r) = 2arcsin(r)$. The valiue of this density at $r=0$ is equal to $A$, and it diverges as $r$ tends to 1.



Upd. This expression is obtained in the following way.
For any pair of holes let's draw z-axis through one of them and the center of sphere. Then a position of the second is defined by a polar angle $varphiin[0,pi]$. The angle is random
and the corresponding pdf is $w_1(varphi)=sin(varphi)/2$. Uniform distribution of "matter" along the line connecting two holes leads to the following distribution of radius:
$$
w_2(r|varphi) = fracrcos(varphi/2)sqrtr^2-sin^2(varphi/2),
$$

where $rin[sin(varphi/2),1]$. The minimal value of radius along the line is equal to $sin(varphi/2)$, hence the definition of $varphi(r)$. Averaging with respect to angles gives the radius pdf:
$$
w_3(r) = int_0^varphi(r) w_1(varphi)w_2(r|varphi)dvarphi .
$$

And the density of "matter" is proportional to $w_3(r)/r^2$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



Added. Now, I think that G. Smith gave the right answer to the initial question. And I was solving a different problem. My former solution implies that we chose any thread with equal probability and then uniformly chose the point of this thread. This procedure is not equivalent to the finding of mass distribution. To find the distribution of mass we should choose threads with probabilities proportional to their length. Just because of the lengthy thread contains more mass. Doing like this one obtains a mass distribution with constant density.



Former solution. I obtained the following expression for the density of "matter" inside the sphere of radius 1
$$
rho(r) = fracArlogleft(fracsqrt2(1+r)sqrt+sqrt2cos(varphi(r)/2)right).
$$

Here $A$ is constant and $varphi(r) = 2arcsin(r)$. The valiue of this density at $r=0$ is equal to $A$, and it diverges as $r$ tends to 1.



Upd. This expression is obtained in the following way.
For any pair of holes let's draw z-axis through one of them and the center of sphere. Then a position of the second is defined by a polar angle $varphiin[0,pi]$. The angle is random
and the corresponding pdf is $w_1(varphi)=sin(varphi)/2$. Uniform distribution of "matter" along the line connecting two holes leads to the following distribution of radius:
$$
w_2(r|varphi) = fracrcos(varphi/2)sqrtr^2-sin^2(varphi/2),
$$

where $rin[sin(varphi/2),1]$. The minimal value of radius along the line is equal to $sin(varphi/2)$, hence the definition of $varphi(r)$. Averaging with respect to angles gives the radius pdf:
$$
w_3(r) = int_0^varphi(r) w_1(varphi)w_2(r|varphi)dvarphi .
$$

And the density of "matter" is proportional to $w_3(r)/r^2$.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited yesterday

























answered yesterday









GecGec

887211




887211











  • $begingroup$
    This answer could be simplified greatly by using the formula $cos(2arcsin(x)) = 1-2x^2,.$
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    I think $w_2$ is wrong. If I integrate it over $r$ from $sin(varphi/2)$ to 1, which should give the total mass of a string with polar angle $varphi$, I get 1. But the strings should have different masses. I’m also totally confused because the minimal radius should be $cosvarphi/2$, not $sinvarphi/2$.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    I think $w_2=r/sqrtr^2-cos^2(varphi/2)$.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    @G. Smith, I think I was solving a different problem. And you gave the right answer to the initial question.
    $endgroup$
    – Gec
    yesterday
















  • $begingroup$
    This answer could be simplified greatly by using the formula $cos(2arcsin(x)) = 1-2x^2,.$
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    I think $w_2$ is wrong. If I integrate it over $r$ from $sin(varphi/2)$ to 1, which should give the total mass of a string with polar angle $varphi$, I get 1. But the strings should have different masses. I’m also totally confused because the minimal radius should be $cosvarphi/2$, not $sinvarphi/2$.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    I think $w_2=r/sqrtr^2-cos^2(varphi/2)$.
    $endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    @G. Smith, I think I was solving a different problem. And you gave the right answer to the initial question.
    $endgroup$
    – Gec
    yesterday















$begingroup$
This answer could be simplified greatly by using the formula $cos(2arcsin(x)) = 1-2x^2,.$
$endgroup$
– Peter Shor
yesterday





$begingroup$
This answer could be simplified greatly by using the formula $cos(2arcsin(x)) = 1-2x^2,.$
$endgroup$
– Peter Shor
yesterday













$begingroup$
I think $w_2$ is wrong. If I integrate it over $r$ from $sin(varphi/2)$ to 1, which should give the total mass of a string with polar angle $varphi$, I get 1. But the strings should have different masses. I’m also totally confused because the minimal radius should be $cosvarphi/2$, not $sinvarphi/2$.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
yesterday




$begingroup$
I think $w_2$ is wrong. If I integrate it over $r$ from $sin(varphi/2)$ to 1, which should give the total mass of a string with polar angle $varphi$, I get 1. But the strings should have different masses. I’m also totally confused because the minimal radius should be $cosvarphi/2$, not $sinvarphi/2$.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
yesterday












$begingroup$
I think $w_2=r/sqrtr^2-cos^2(varphi/2)$.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
yesterday





$begingroup$
I think $w_2=r/sqrtr^2-cos^2(varphi/2)$.
$endgroup$
– G. Smith
yesterday













$begingroup$
@G. Smith, I think I was solving a different problem. And you gave the right answer to the initial question.
$endgroup$
– Gec
yesterday




$begingroup$
@G. Smith, I think I was solving a different problem. And you gave the right answer to the initial question.
$endgroup$
– Gec
yesterday











0












$begingroup$

While the number of strings passing nearby the shell is higher than that of the strings passing through the center, also the constant radius surfaces near the shell are larger than those near the center of the sphere.



We can define the string density $rho $ through



$$4pi r^2rho(r)= N (r) $$



where $N (r) $ is the number of times that the strings intersect the constant radius $r$ surface.



Note that, assuming the holes follow a homogeneous distribution, in the limit of large number of holes you are just connecting random points of the sphere with lines that cross the sphere.



Fixed a point from which the line is drawn, you have equal probability of connecting it to any other point of the sphere.



The line (string) will pass through the center only if the opposite point is chosen.



Conversely every line will pass through the sphere surface and almost every line will pass at a slightly smaller radius.



You can compute the number of lines of a certain length $L $ that can be drawn from a chosen point; even better you can express this using the angle formed by the two points connected and the center of the sphere:
$$L=2Rsintheta;,qquad
N_L= 2pi R sin 2theta$$

The segments corresponding to an angle $theta$ will contribute to the density for radiai in the range $[Rcostheta, R]$ with 2 points each except in the case of the minimum radius value (here the string passes only once).
Now $N (r) $ will be proportional to



$$ int_theta*^pi/2 2pi R sin (2theta)dtheta $$



where $costheta*=frac rR$.
The proportionality constant is basically the number of the endpoints since you integrate their distribution on the $R $ shell (you also have a factor 2 because each string is counted twice almost everywhere and a factor 1/2 to avoid the overcounting when integrating over endpoints).



The integral gives $$2pi R left(frac rRright)^2$$



so that when you compute $rho (r)$ you indeed get a term which is independent from $r $.



If we were to stop here, the density would be uniform.



One could think that we still need to remove the overcounting of pieces of string in the minimum radius each segment reaches:
do we have to subtract from $N (r)$ one counting of the intersection at minimum radius, i.e. the quantity $$2pi R sin (2theta*)$$



This would give a part which is dependent on $r $ in the distribution: $$rho (r)sim const+frac sqrt1-(r/R)^2r$$



The truth is that the term must be subtracted into the integral of $N (r) $ and there gives zero contribute, since its a modification on a set of zero measure.



So in conclusion there is no term to be subtracted and the density is indeed constant.
It would be nice to see if there are other endpoints distributions that are mimicked by the string density..






share|cite|improve this answer










New contributor




france95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    You seem to have neglected the fact that, while a shell of radius $r$ around the midpoint of the sphere will indeed have less threads passing through it as $r$ decreases, it also has correspondingly less area. A priori, without calculating the expected number of threads passing through the shell, it doesn't seem obvious which effect will dominate -- and, in fact, G. Smith's numerical results seem to suggest that they might cancel out exactly!
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Yeah @Ilmari Karonen you are right! Indeed the effect precisely cancels the radial growth. I will soon add the explicit computations
    $endgroup$
    – france95
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    Why not simplify $sin(arccos(x))$?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    @Peter Shor yes, but more importantly there is no need to subtract that term I think. (See how I edited)
    $endgroup$
    – france95
    yesterday















0












$begingroup$

While the number of strings passing nearby the shell is higher than that of the strings passing through the center, also the constant radius surfaces near the shell are larger than those near the center of the sphere.



We can define the string density $rho $ through



$$4pi r^2rho(r)= N (r) $$



where $N (r) $ is the number of times that the strings intersect the constant radius $r$ surface.



Note that, assuming the holes follow a homogeneous distribution, in the limit of large number of holes you are just connecting random points of the sphere with lines that cross the sphere.



Fixed a point from which the line is drawn, you have equal probability of connecting it to any other point of the sphere.



The line (string) will pass through the center only if the opposite point is chosen.



Conversely every line will pass through the sphere surface and almost every line will pass at a slightly smaller radius.



You can compute the number of lines of a certain length $L $ that can be drawn from a chosen point; even better you can express this using the angle formed by the two points connected and the center of the sphere:
$$L=2Rsintheta;,qquad
N_L= 2pi R sin 2theta$$

The segments corresponding to an angle $theta$ will contribute to the density for radiai in the range $[Rcostheta, R]$ with 2 points each except in the case of the minimum radius value (here the string passes only once).
Now $N (r) $ will be proportional to



$$ int_theta*^pi/2 2pi R sin (2theta)dtheta $$



where $costheta*=frac rR$.
The proportionality constant is basically the number of the endpoints since you integrate their distribution on the $R $ shell (you also have a factor 2 because each string is counted twice almost everywhere and a factor 1/2 to avoid the overcounting when integrating over endpoints).



The integral gives $$2pi R left(frac rRright)^2$$



so that when you compute $rho (r)$ you indeed get a term which is independent from $r $.



If we were to stop here, the density would be uniform.



One could think that we still need to remove the overcounting of pieces of string in the minimum radius each segment reaches:
do we have to subtract from $N (r)$ one counting of the intersection at minimum radius, i.e. the quantity $$2pi R sin (2theta*)$$



This would give a part which is dependent on $r $ in the distribution: $$rho (r)sim const+frac sqrt1-(r/R)^2r$$



The truth is that the term must be subtracted into the integral of $N (r) $ and there gives zero contribute, since its a modification on a set of zero measure.



So in conclusion there is no term to be subtracted and the density is indeed constant.
It would be nice to see if there are other endpoints distributions that are mimicked by the string density..






share|cite|improve this answer










New contributor




france95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    You seem to have neglected the fact that, while a shell of radius $r$ around the midpoint of the sphere will indeed have less threads passing through it as $r$ decreases, it also has correspondingly less area. A priori, without calculating the expected number of threads passing through the shell, it doesn't seem obvious which effect will dominate -- and, in fact, G. Smith's numerical results seem to suggest that they might cancel out exactly!
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Yeah @Ilmari Karonen you are right! Indeed the effect precisely cancels the radial growth. I will soon add the explicit computations
    $endgroup$
    – france95
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    Why not simplify $sin(arccos(x))$?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    @Peter Shor yes, but more importantly there is no need to subtract that term I think. (See how I edited)
    $endgroup$
    – france95
    yesterday













0












0








0





$begingroup$

While the number of strings passing nearby the shell is higher than that of the strings passing through the center, also the constant radius surfaces near the shell are larger than those near the center of the sphere.



We can define the string density $rho $ through



$$4pi r^2rho(r)= N (r) $$



where $N (r) $ is the number of times that the strings intersect the constant radius $r$ surface.



Note that, assuming the holes follow a homogeneous distribution, in the limit of large number of holes you are just connecting random points of the sphere with lines that cross the sphere.



Fixed a point from which the line is drawn, you have equal probability of connecting it to any other point of the sphere.



The line (string) will pass through the center only if the opposite point is chosen.



Conversely every line will pass through the sphere surface and almost every line will pass at a slightly smaller radius.



You can compute the number of lines of a certain length $L $ that can be drawn from a chosen point; even better you can express this using the angle formed by the two points connected and the center of the sphere:
$$L=2Rsintheta;,qquad
N_L= 2pi R sin 2theta$$

The segments corresponding to an angle $theta$ will contribute to the density for radiai in the range $[Rcostheta, R]$ with 2 points each except in the case of the minimum radius value (here the string passes only once).
Now $N (r) $ will be proportional to



$$ int_theta*^pi/2 2pi R sin (2theta)dtheta $$



where $costheta*=frac rR$.
The proportionality constant is basically the number of the endpoints since you integrate their distribution on the $R $ shell (you also have a factor 2 because each string is counted twice almost everywhere and a factor 1/2 to avoid the overcounting when integrating over endpoints).



The integral gives $$2pi R left(frac rRright)^2$$



so that when you compute $rho (r)$ you indeed get a term which is independent from $r $.



If we were to stop here, the density would be uniform.



One could think that we still need to remove the overcounting of pieces of string in the minimum radius each segment reaches:
do we have to subtract from $N (r)$ one counting of the intersection at minimum radius, i.e. the quantity $$2pi R sin (2theta*)$$



This would give a part which is dependent on $r $ in the distribution: $$rho (r)sim const+frac sqrt1-(r/R)^2r$$



The truth is that the term must be subtracted into the integral of $N (r) $ and there gives zero contribute, since its a modification on a set of zero measure.



So in conclusion there is no term to be subtracted and the density is indeed constant.
It would be nice to see if there are other endpoints distributions that are mimicked by the string density..






share|cite|improve this answer










New contributor




france95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$



While the number of strings passing nearby the shell is higher than that of the strings passing through the center, also the constant radius surfaces near the shell are larger than those near the center of the sphere.



We can define the string density $rho $ through



$$4pi r^2rho(r)= N (r) $$



where $N (r) $ is the number of times that the strings intersect the constant radius $r$ surface.



Note that, assuming the holes follow a homogeneous distribution, in the limit of large number of holes you are just connecting random points of the sphere with lines that cross the sphere.



Fixed a point from which the line is drawn, you have equal probability of connecting it to any other point of the sphere.



The line (string) will pass through the center only if the opposite point is chosen.



Conversely every line will pass through the sphere surface and almost every line will pass at a slightly smaller radius.



You can compute the number of lines of a certain length $L $ that can be drawn from a chosen point; even better you can express this using the angle formed by the two points connected and the center of the sphere:
$$L=2Rsintheta;,qquad
N_L= 2pi R sin 2theta$$

The segments corresponding to an angle $theta$ will contribute to the density for radiai in the range $[Rcostheta, R]$ with 2 points each except in the case of the minimum radius value (here the string passes only once).
Now $N (r) $ will be proportional to



$$ int_theta*^pi/2 2pi R sin (2theta)dtheta $$



where $costheta*=frac rR$.
The proportionality constant is basically the number of the endpoints since you integrate their distribution on the $R $ shell (you also have a factor 2 because each string is counted twice almost everywhere and a factor 1/2 to avoid the overcounting when integrating over endpoints).



The integral gives $$2pi R left(frac rRright)^2$$



so that when you compute $rho (r)$ you indeed get a term which is independent from $r $.



If we were to stop here, the density would be uniform.



One could think that we still need to remove the overcounting of pieces of string in the minimum radius each segment reaches:
do we have to subtract from $N (r)$ one counting of the intersection at minimum radius, i.e. the quantity $$2pi R sin (2theta*)$$



This would give a part which is dependent on $r $ in the distribution: $$rho (r)sim const+frac sqrt1-(r/R)^2r$$



The truth is that the term must be subtracted into the integral of $N (r) $ and there gives zero contribute, since its a modification on a set of zero measure.



So in conclusion there is no term to be subtracted and the density is indeed constant.
It would be nice to see if there are other endpoints distributions that are mimicked by the string density..







share|cite|improve this answer










New contributor




france95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited yesterday





















New contributor




france95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered yesterday









france95france95

335




335




New contributor




france95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





france95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






france95 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











  • $begingroup$
    You seem to have neglected the fact that, while a shell of radius $r$ around the midpoint of the sphere will indeed have less threads passing through it as $r$ decreases, it also has correspondingly less area. A priori, without calculating the expected number of threads passing through the shell, it doesn't seem obvious which effect will dominate -- and, in fact, G. Smith's numerical results seem to suggest that they might cancel out exactly!
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Yeah @Ilmari Karonen you are right! Indeed the effect precisely cancels the radial growth. I will soon add the explicit computations
    $endgroup$
    – france95
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    Why not simplify $sin(arccos(x))$?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    @Peter Shor yes, but more importantly there is no need to subtract that term I think. (See how I edited)
    $endgroup$
    – france95
    yesterday
















  • $begingroup$
    You seem to have neglected the fact that, while a shell of radius $r$ around the midpoint of the sphere will indeed have less threads passing through it as $r$ decreases, it also has correspondingly less area. A priori, without calculating the expected number of threads passing through the shell, it doesn't seem obvious which effect will dominate -- and, in fact, G. Smith's numerical results seem to suggest that they might cancel out exactly!
    $endgroup$
    – Ilmari Karonen
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    Yeah @Ilmari Karonen you are right! Indeed the effect precisely cancels the radial growth. I will soon add the explicit computations
    $endgroup$
    – france95
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    Why not simplify $sin(arccos(x))$?
    $endgroup$
    – Peter Shor
    yesterday











  • $begingroup$
    @Peter Shor yes, but more importantly there is no need to subtract that term I think. (See how I edited)
    $endgroup$
    – france95
    yesterday















$begingroup$
You seem to have neglected the fact that, while a shell of radius $r$ around the midpoint of the sphere will indeed have less threads passing through it as $r$ decreases, it also has correspondingly less area. A priori, without calculating the expected number of threads passing through the shell, it doesn't seem obvious which effect will dominate -- and, in fact, G. Smith's numerical results seem to suggest that they might cancel out exactly!
$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
yesterday




$begingroup$
You seem to have neglected the fact that, while a shell of radius $r$ around the midpoint of the sphere will indeed have less threads passing through it as $r$ decreases, it also has correspondingly less area. A priori, without calculating the expected number of threads passing through the shell, it doesn't seem obvious which effect will dominate -- and, in fact, G. Smith's numerical results seem to suggest that they might cancel out exactly!
$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
yesterday












$begingroup$
Yeah @Ilmari Karonen you are right! Indeed the effect precisely cancels the radial growth. I will soon add the explicit computations
$endgroup$
– france95
yesterday





$begingroup$
Yeah @Ilmari Karonen you are right! Indeed the effect precisely cancels the radial growth. I will soon add the explicit computations
$endgroup$
– france95
yesterday













$begingroup$
Why not simplify $sin(arccos(x))$?
$endgroup$
– Peter Shor
yesterday





$begingroup$
Why not simplify $sin(arccos(x))$?
$endgroup$
– Peter Shor
yesterday













$begingroup$
@Peter Shor yes, but more importantly there is no need to subtract that term I think. (See how I edited)
$endgroup$
– france95
yesterday




$begingroup$
@Peter Shor yes, but more importantly there is no need to subtract that term I think. (See how I edited)
$endgroup$
– france95
yesterday

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f468700%2fin-a-ball-with-random-thread-strings-how-does-the-density-of-threads-strings-ch%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Sum ergo cogito? 1 nng

419 nièngy_Soadمي 19bal1.5o_g

Queiggey Chernihivv 9NnOo i Zw X QqKk LpB