# Are these forces conservative?

## Homework Statement

a - $\vec F = \vec F_0 \sin(at)$
b - $F = A\theta \hat r$, A constant and $0 \le \theta < 2\pi$. $\vec F$ is limited to the (x,y) plane
c - A force which depends on the velociity of a particle but which is always perpendicular to the velocity

## The Attempt at a Solution

I don't know what to say for (a)

a -
b - Not conservative because $\vec \nabla \times \vec F = -\frac{A}{r} \hat k \neq \vec 0$
c - Conservative because instantaneous work is 0, so the work done on any closed path is 0 : $\vec F.d\vec r = \vec F.\vec v\ dt = 0$

Related Introductory Physics Homework Help News on Phys.org
BvU
Homework Helper
2019 Award
You could look at the criteria ... and get mixed results. So perhaps it's reasonable to check them (what comes out ?) and then think of a counter-example.

The force depends on time and not on position, so the curl test is useless.
Remains the integral test:
$\oint \vec F.d\vec r = \int_0^T \vec F.\vec v\ dt = \int_0^T \vec F_0.\vec v \sin(at)\ dt$
But I don't know what to do with that.

I found something, with the assumption that F is a net force on a body of mass m, with initial velocity equal to v0=0.
Using Newton's 2nd law and integration, I can calculate the position x.
In order to find a closed path, one must find t>0 such that x(t) = x(0) <=> at = sin(at). It is not possible with that force, because the equation x = sin(x) has one solution: x = 0, so at = 0, and t = 0. Therefore, the force is not conservative.

Orodruin
Staff Emeritus
Homework Helper
Gold Member
What happens if you let the force act on an object that takes the path $\vec x(t) = \vec x_0 \cos(at)$ over one full period?

Hello,
If there is no mistakes, I find that the work on this path is $W = -\pi \vec F_0.\vec x_0 \neq 0$, which proves that the force is non conservative. Thanks, that makes it clear !

Orodruin
Staff Emeritus
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Yes, but, note that the other conditions such as $\nabla\times \vec F = 0$ are fulfilled. The point is that the conditions are equivalent only for force fields that do not depend explicitly on time. Even if a time dependent force field has a potential for every fixed time, the time dependence breaks time translation invariance, which is what leads to energy conservation through Noether's theorem.

Thank you for your counter example !
( Last post is too advanced for me, sorry, I wish I could reflect on that )

BvU
Homework Helper
2019 Award
 wrote this earlier, forgot to post...

The force depends on time and not on position, so the curl test is useless.
Curl is zero and F can be written as the gradient of a potential. But the equivalence of these two with the integral test is lost (at least for trajectories that take a finite time). Oro has a sophisticated way of saying that in #6.

His counter-example is one of the many possible.
The one I was thinking of is this force driving a harmonic oscillator (without damping and with the same natural frequency). The the oscillator amplitude keeps growing, meaning work is transferred to it. Work that the force field does.  I realize it's almost the same example!
A closer-by example: pushing a swing. A little push every time at the right time gives a big amplitude after a while.

Ahhh, ok ! I understand now. Thank you !