Angular momentum in Lagrangian Mechanics

Click For Summary
In the discussion on angular momentum in Lagrangian mechanics, the focus is on deriving equations of motion using two different approaches while analyzing the role of angular momentum. The first method applies the Euler-Lagrange equation directly to the radial coordinate, leading to a specific relationship involving angular momentum. The second method involves substituting angular momentum before applying the Euler-Lagrange equation, resulting in a contrasting sign in the derived equation. The key point raised is the distinction between the time derivative of angular momentum being constant and the partial derivative with respect to radius not being zero. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding these relationships within the framework of Lagrangian mechanics.
TheDragon
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
In Newton's problem,and other central force problems in Classical Mechanics, you can get with decreasing the center of mass movement to the lagrangian:
L=1/2m(r' ^2+r^2 \varphi'^2)-V(r)
because \varphi is cyclic, you can write:
\frac{d}{dt}(mr^2 \varphi')=0
or, defining the angular momentum:
mr^2 \varphi'=l

In order for you to understand my question we will go through two ways:

Way no.1) Now if you go ahead and use euler-lagrange equation to r you will get:
\frac{d}{dt}(mr')=mr\varphi'^2-\frac{∂V(r)}{∂r}
and exchanging for l you can get:
\frac{d}{dt}(mr')=\frac{l^2}{mr^3}-\frac{∂V(r)}{∂r}

Way no.2) But if you first excange phi and then use euler-lagrange to r you get:
L=1/2m(r' ^2+\frac{l^2}{m^2r^2})-V(r)=1/2mr' ^2+\frac{l^2}{2mr^2}-V(r)
and then euler lagrange for r:
\frac{d}{dt}(mr')=\frac{∂}{∂r}(\frac{l^2}{2mr^2})-\frac{∂V(r)}{∂r}=-\frac{l^2}{mr^3}-\frac{∂V(r)}{∂r}

The plus in way no.1 became a minus in way no.2. How can you explain it?
If you can, don't show me a solution using energy because I already know that one. I want to use only lagrangian formalism.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The answer to the question is that the angular momentum is a constant in relation to time, but the partial derivative in r is not zero. In other words:
\frac{dl}{dt}=0,

\frac{∂l}{∂r}\neq0.

I do think that:
\frac{dl}{dr}=0.
 
For simple comparison, I think the same thought process can be followed as a block slides down a hill, - for block down hill, simple starting PE of mgh to final max KE 0.5mv^2 - comparing PE1 to max KE2 would result in finding the work friction did through the process. efficiency is just 100*KE2/PE1. If a mousetrap car travels along a flat surface, a starting PE of 0.5 k th^2 can be measured and maximum velocity of the car can also be measured. If energy efficiency is defined by...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
546
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K