2 Body Radial Equation, Effective Potential derivation

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the derivation of the effective potential \( U_{eff} \) in the context of classical mechanics, specifically using the Lagrangian \( L = \frac{1}{2}\mu(\dot{r}^2 + r^2\dot{\phi}^2) - V(r) \). Two approaches to substituting angular momentum \( l \) into Lagrange's equation are compared, revealing that the effective potential is derived as \( V(r) + \frac{l^2}{2\mu r^2} \) when substituting after taking derivatives, while an incorrect result \( V(r) - \frac{l^2}{2\mu r^2} \) arises when substituting before. The error is attributed to the dependency between \( r \) and \( \dot{\phi} \), which affects the independence of the equations of motion.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrangian mechanics
  • Familiarity with angular momentum in classical physics
  • Knowledge of effective potential concepts
  • Proficiency in calculus, particularly differentiation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of effective potential in classical mechanics
  • Learn about the action principle and its implications in Lagrangian dynamics
  • Explore the relationship between generalized coordinates and velocities
  • Investigate common pitfalls in applying Lagrange's equations
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those studying classical mechanics, Lagrangian dynamics, and effective potential analysis.

vancouver_water
Messages
76
Reaction score
10
According to my textbook, in the derivation for the effective potential U_{eff}, starting with the Lagrangian L = \frac{1}{2}\mu(\dot r^2 +r^2\dot\phi^2) -V(r), substituting into Lagrange's equation gives \mu\ddot r = -\frac{\partial V}{\partial r} + \frac{l^2}{\mu r^3} = -\frac{\partial}{\partial r}(V(r) + \frac{l^2}{2\mu r^2}), where the substitution \dot\phi = \frac{l}{r^2\mu} is made after substituting into Lagrange's equation and the effective potential is V(r) + \frac{l^2}{2\mu r^2} and l is the angular momentum.

However, when I do the derivation by first substituting the angular momentum, it goes like this: Starting with L = \frac{1}{2}\mu(\dot r^2 +\frac{l^2}{\mu^2 r^2}) -V(r), then substituting into lagranges equation gives \mu\ddot r = -\frac{\partial V}{\partial r} - \frac{l^2}{\mu r^3} = -\frac{\partial}{\partial r}(V(r) - \frac{l^2}{2\mu r^2}), where the effective potential is V(r) - \frac{l^2}{2\mu r^2}.

This is the wrong result, but I can't see why substituting angular momentum before or after taking the derivatives should make any difference.

Thanks for any help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
vancouver_water said:
This is the wrong result, but I can't see why substituting angular momentum before or after taking the derivatives should make any difference.

actually we use r,theta description.
here theta is replaced by phi...
no matter but r, dr/dt, phi, dphi/dt are the generalised coordinates and velocities ;
naturally one has two Lagranges equations - and if the result of second Lagranges equation is put in the definition of L itself to describe r-ewuation ; you have problem - the two are independent equations in r and phi.
so the action principle must be getting affected.
r^2. phi(dot) is a constant -where r and phi(dot) both can vary such that the product is a constant.
the error lies in the r-equation as this condition which implicitly connects r and phi(dot) is no longer an independent equation of motion in r.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K