Difference between revisions of "Forest for the trees"

From Universe in Problems
Jump to: navigation, search
(Problem 1: the Olbers' paradox)
(Problem 2: a down to earth setting)
Line 41: Line 41:
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div class="NavHead">solution</div>
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
 
   <div style="width:100%;" class="NavContent">
     <p style="text-align: left;">Let's draw a circle of radius $x$ around an observer. Part of an observers' viewfield $s(x),\;0 \le s(x) \le 1$ is hidden by trees. Next, expand the observation region by $dx$, passing to a circle of radius  $x+dx$. There are $n\times 2\pi xdx$ trees in a ring between the circles. They overlap the portion $nDdx$ of observed circle. Since portion $s(x)$ was already overlaped, the additional overlap is $\left[ {1 - s(x)} \right]nDdx$. Hence,
+
     <p style="text-align: left;">Lets draw a circle of radius $x$ around an observer. Part of the observer's field of  view $s(x),\;0 \le s(x) \le 1$ is hidden by trees. Next, expand the observation region by $dx$, passing to a circle of radius  $x+dx$. There are $n\times 2\pi xdx$ trees in the ring between the circles. They overlap the portion $nDdx$ of the observed circle. Since portion $s(x)$ was already overlaped, the additional overlap is $\left[1 - s(x)\right]nDdx$. Hence
$$
+
\[s(x + dx) - s(x) = \left[ {1 - s(x)} \right]nDdx\]
s(x + dx) - s(x) = \left[ {1 - s(x)} \right]nDdx
+
or
$$ or
+
\[{{ds} \over {dx}} = \left[ {1 - s(x)} \right]nD.\]
$$
+
This equation could be easily integrated
{{ds} \over {dx}} = \left[ {1 - s(x)} \right]nD.
+
\[\int_0^s {{ds} \over {1 - s}}  = \int_0^x {nDdx},\]
$$
+
giving the solution
This equation could be easily integrated as
+
\[s(x) = 1 - e^{ - nDx}.\]
$$
+
This is the probability that when looking at random direction, the line of sight is blocked by a tree at distance no greater than $x$. Hence, the mean "free sight" length is
\int_0^s {{ds} \over {1 - s}}  = \int_0^x {nDdx},
+
\[\lambda  = \int_0^\infty  x {{ds(x)} \over {dx}}dx = {1 \over {nD}}.\]
$$
+
If there are $1000$  trees per hectare with the diameter of the trunk $20 \mbox{cm}$, the mean length of sight is $50 \mbox{m}$.
thus obtaining a solution
+
$$
+
s(x) = 1 - e^{ - nDx}.
+
$$
+
This value is a probability that looking at random direction, sight could reach no more than $x$, i.e. it reach a tree at distance $x$. Hence, the mean length of "free sight" is
+
$$
+
\lambda  = \int_0^\infty  x {{ds(x)} \over {dx}}dx = {1 \over {nD}}.
+
$$
+
If there are $1000$  trees on one hectare and diameter of trunk is $20 \mbox{cm}$, the mean length of sight is $50 \mbox{m}$.
+
  
This result could be generalized to 3-dimensional case. There are $n$ stars in unit volume and each star has diameter $D$. If the surface, perpedicular to the line of sight is $A=\pi D^2/4$, then
+
This result can be generalized to the 3-dimensional case. There are $n$ stars per unit volume and each star has diameter $D$. If the surface perpedicular to the line of sight is $A=\pi D^2/4$, then
$$
+
\[s(x) = 1 - e^{ - nAx}\]
s(x) = 1 - e^{ - nAx}
+
$$
+
 
and
 
and
$$
+
\[\lambda  = {1 \over {nA}}.\]
\lambda  = {1 \over {nA}}.
+
If the Universe was infinitely old and infinitely extended, then the line of sight would reach a surface of a star in finite time (and at finite distance). This is the meaning of Olbers' paradox.</p>
$$
+
If the Universe was infinitely old and infinitely extended, then line of sight would reach a surface of a star in finite time (and at finite distance). This is the meaning of Olbers' paradox.</p>
+
 
   </div>
 
   </div>
 
</div></div>
 
</div></div>
Line 78: Line 65:
 
<div id="razm44"></div>
 
<div id="razm44"></div>
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 
<div style="border: 1px solid #AAA; padding:5px;">
 +
 
=== Problem 3: a Robin Hood setting ===
 
=== Problem 3: a Robin Hood setting ===
 
In a more romantic formulation this problem looks as following. Suppose that in the Sherwood Forest, the average radius of a tree is $30cm$ and average number of trees per unit area is $n=0.005m^{-2}$. If Robin Hood shoots an arrow in a random direction, how far, on average, will it travel before it strikes a tree?
 
In a more romantic formulation this problem looks as following. Suppose that in the Sherwood Forest, the average radius of a tree is $30cm$ and average number of trees per unit area is $n=0.005m^{-2}$. If Robin Hood shoots an arrow in a random direction, how far, on average, will it travel before it strikes a tree?

Revision as of 17:27, 10 November 2012



Problem 1: the Olbers' paradox

If the Universe was infinitely old and infinitely extended, and stars could shine eternally, then in whatever direction you look the line of your sight should cross the surface of a star, and therefore all the sky should be as bright as the Sun's surface. This notion is known under the name of Olbers' paradox. Formulate the Olbers' paradox quantitatively

L. Anchordoqui, arXiv:physics.ed-ph/0706.1988.


Problem 2: a down to earth setting

There are $n$ trees per hectare in a forest. Diameter of each one is $D$. Starting from what distance will we be unable to see the forest for the trees? How is this question connected to the Olbers' paradox$^*$?

$^*$ Ryden, Introduction to cosmology, ADDISON-Wesley.


Problem 3: a Robin Hood setting

In a more romantic formulation this problem looks as following. Suppose that in the Sherwood Forest, the average radius of a tree is $30cm$ and average number of trees per unit area is $n=0.005m^{-2}$. If Robin Hood shoots an arrow in a random direction, how far, on average, will it travel before it strikes a tree?


Problem 4: the cosmological setting

The same problem in the cosmological formulation looks this way. Suppose you are in a infinitely large, infinitely old Universe in which the average density of stars is $n_{st}=10^11 Mpc^{-3}$ and the average stellar radius is equal to the Sun's radius: $R_{st}=R_{\bigodot}=7\cdot10^8m$. How far, on average, could you see in any direction before your line of sight strucks a star?


Problem 5: stars collisions

Demonstrate, that stars in galaxies can be considered a collisionless medium.