Center of mass and REduced mass

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of center of mass and reduced mass, exploring their mathematical relationships and implications in both two-body and multi-body systems. Participants seek clarification on how these concepts relate conceptually and mathematically, particularly in the context of more than two masses.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant requests help in understanding the relationship between center of mass and reduced mass both conceptually and mathematically.
  • Another participant provides the formulas for reduced mass and center of mass, indicating a basic understanding of their definitions.
  • A question is raised about the application of the reduced mass formula to systems with more than two masses, suggesting a potential extension of the formula.
  • One participant proposes a formula for reduced mass in a multi-mass system but expresses uncertainty about its physical meaning.
  • Another participant suggests that the reduced mass concept could be generalized to a matrix form for N-particle systems, detailing an energy equation that incorporates this idea.
  • There is a clarification that the center of mass is a position rather than a mass, emphasizing the distinction between the two concepts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of the reduced mass concept to multiple masses, with some proposing extensions while others question their validity. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the generalization of reduced mass and its implications.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in their understanding and the need for further clarification on the physical meaning of proposed extensions and formulations.

PeteGt
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
I forget how these two relate both conceptually and mathematically...any help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
\mu = \frac{m_1m_2}{m_1 + m_2}

m_{cm} = \frac{\sum x_n m_n}{\sum m_n}

cookiemonster
 
So what about more than one mass? So would the reduced mass formula really be 1/u=1/m1+1/m2+1/m3+...
 
Honestly, I've never seen it for more than two masses, but I suppose the most logical extension would be

\frac{1}{\mu} = \sum \frac{1}{m_n}

That being said, the above expression may have absolutely no physical meaning. I don't know.

Anyway, for the uses of the center of mass and reduced mass together is a 2-body problem. The math simplifies in the center of mass coordinate system and when you use the center of mass coordinate system, the math involved makes it convenient to define reduced mass as such.

cookiemonster

Edit: I say "the most logical extension" because reduced mass is also defined as

\frac{1}{\mu} = \frac{1}{m_1} + \frac{1}{m_2}

You can use a bit of algebra to demonstrate that this equation is simply a rearrangement of the first one I gave.

Edit2: Which I would have known you already knew had I read your post more carefully...
 
Last edited:
I think the reduced-mass concept should be generalized to a matrix rather than to a scalar. If we consider a N-particle system where the particle positions x(i) are measured relative to the C.M., we have, for a conservative system, that the energy equation (f.ex.) may be written as:
1/2*MV^(2)+1/2*(v^(T)*Q*v)+U=const.
Here, M is the system's total mass, V is the speed of C.M, U is the potential energy; whereas v is the N-vector of particle velocities, v^(T)=(v(1),..,v(N))
(T is for transpose)
(v(i)=dx(i)/dt)).
Q is the N*N diagonal mass matrix, Q(j,j)=m(j), where m(j) is the mass of the j-th particle.
(The resulting product of velocities, f.ex. v(j)^(2) is the dot product if v(j) is a vector.)

We have, by definition of particle positions relative to C.M, m(i)*x(i)=0, where summing over i=1,..N is implied.
Hence, we may eliminate a particle (the N'th, f.ex.), from our system, and
we represent the other particles by their distances x(i,N) (i=1,..N-1):
x(i)=x(N)+x(i,N), i=1,..N-1, v(i,N)=dx(i,N)/dt, vrel^(T)=(v(1,N),...v(N-1,N))

The energy equation may now be rewritten as:
1/2*MV^(2)+1/2*(vrel^(T)*R*vrel)+U=const.

Here, R is the (N-1)*(N-1) reduced mass matrix with respect to particle N:

R(j,j)=r(j,j)=m(j)(M-m(j))/M
R(i,j)=R(j,i)=-r(i,j), r(i,j)=m(i)*m(j)/M (i not equal to j)

We see that r(i,j) is less than both m(i) and m(j).
Again, products of velocities should be regarded as inner products if the velocities v(i,N) are vectors.
 
cookiemonster said:
m_{cm} = \frac{\sum x_n m_n}{\sum m_n}

cookiemonster

The centre of mass is a position, not a mass.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 141 ·
5
Replies
141
Views
8K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 88 ·
3
Replies
88
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K