Central Forces and Angular Momentum

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between central forces, angular momentum, and work done in the context of a mass in an elliptical orbit. Participants explore the implications of conservation laws on kinetic and potential energy, as well as the conditions under which these principles hold true.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the work done by a central force is equal to the variation of kinetic energy due to conservation of angular momentum.
  • Others argue that if only the work done from potential energy is considered, angular momentum may not be conserved, suggesting that additional work is necessary for conservation.
  • A participant clarifies that angular momentum is a vector quantity and must be treated as such, emphasizing the importance of the angle between the position and velocity vectors.
  • It is noted that there is a unique world line that satisfies both the variation of potential energy and angular momentum, given specific initial conditions.
  • Some participants express confusion about the conditions under which energy and angular momentum are conserved, indicating that not all values of radius allow for conservation simultaneously.
  • One participant mentions that a central force must be a sensible function of radius to be conservative, implying a relationship between the nature of the force and conservation laws.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the implications of conservation laws in relation to work done by central forces. While some assert that additional work is necessary for conservation, others maintain that conservation holds under specific conditions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact nature of these relationships.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on specific definitions of radius and velocity, as well as the conditions under which conservation laws apply. The discussion does not resolve the mathematical steps involved in the arguments presented.

azabak
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Imagine a mass in an elliptical orbit around a central force. If such force is inversely proportional to the distance squared then the mass will accelerate when going nearer the focus. At the same time the angular momentum of the orbit is a constant.
Can one show that the work done by the force is equal to the variation of kinetic energy solely due the conservation of angular momentum?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hi azabak! :wink:
azabak said:
Can one show that the work done by the force is equal to the variation of kinetic energy solely due the conservation of angular momentum?

work done is always equal to the variation of kinetic energy :smile:
 
I'm ok with the basic concepts. My doubt is that since the distance from the focus decreases two things must happen: conservation of angular momentum and work done by the force. If you calculate just the work done due the variation of potential energy angular momentum is not conserved. For it to happen the force must do an "extra" work. In any situation of rotation conservation of angular momentum is the important factor. Therefore accepting that angular momentum is always conserved implies accepting that any central force does more work than the variation of potential energy.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
 
azabak said:
If you calculate just the work done due the variation of potential energy angular momentum is not conserved.
Why is that?
For it to happen the force must do an "extra" work.
What do you mean?
 
The angular momentum of a mass m is L = m*v*R.
The central force is F = -k*m/R² where k is a constant.
The radius varies from R to r.
The work done W = -ΔU and the potential energy U = -k*m*/R.
The final kinetic energy due variation of potential energy is K = (m*v²/2)+(k*m*((1/R)-(1/r))).
To conserve the angular momentum the final kinetic energy should be K = (m*v²*R²)/(2*r²), which will be larger than the calculated just from variation of potential energy.
Therefore there must be an additional work in order to conserve angular momentum.
 
azabak said:
The angular momentum of a mass m is L = m*v*R.
Careful. Angular momentum is a vector quantity:
[tex]\vec{L} = \vec{r}\times m\vec{v}[/tex]
The angle between the vectors v and r is important.

Angular momentum, properly defined as the vector product above, is conserved, but the quantity m*v*R is not.
 
Oh, I see. Thank you very much.
 
azabak said:
The angular momentum of a mass m is L = m*v*R.
The central force is F = -k*m/R² where k is a constant.
The radius varies from R to r.
The work done W = -ΔU and the potential energy U = -k*m*/R.
The final kinetic energy due variation of potential energy is K = (m*v²/2)+(k*m*((1/R)-(1/r))).
To conserve the angular momentum the final kinetic energy should be K = (m*v²*R²)/(2*r²), which will be larger than the calculated just from variation of potential energy.
Therefore there must be an additional work in order to conserve angular momentum.

If you use the apihelion and the perihelion distance for r and R, so as to escape Doc Al's objection, you will find that you can't freely choose v, R and r. If you give the apihelion distance, and the initial speed, the perihelion distance is fixed so that both energy and angular momentum are conserved, and the 2 energies you computed are equal.

(At the perihelion and apihelion the distance vector r is perpendicular to v, so the magnitude of the angular momentum is equal to m*r*v)
 
So this implies that there's a unique world line such that both the variation of potential energy and angular momentum match the "required" kinetic energy.
 
  • #10
azabak said:
So this implies that there's a unique world line such that both the variation of potential energy and angular momentum match the "required" kinetic energy.

There's always an unique wordline if you specify an initial position and velocity. If you have a central force and a conservative force field, angular momentum and total energy will be conserved.
 
  • #11
hi azabak! :smile:
azabak said:
If you calculate just the work done due the variation of potential energy angular momentum is not conserved. For it to happen the force must do an "extra" work. In any situation of rotation conservation of angular momentum is the important factor. Therefore accepting that angular momentum is always conserved implies accepting that any central force does more work than the variation of potential energy.

i don't understand this :confused:

potential energy is defined as minus the work done by a conservative force

angular momentum is always conserved if the force is central

(proof: d/dt(r x mr') = r x mr'' = r x F

which by definition is 0 if F is central)​

and any central force which is a sensible function of r will be the gradient of a scalar, and so will be conservative :smile:

as willem2 :smile: says …​
willem2 said:
If you have a central force and a conservative force field, angular momentum and total energy will be conserved.
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Hi tiny-tim.
I previously considered that the energy and angular momentum were conserved for any value of the radius. Then willem2 cleared me that it can only happen for a certain defined values of the radius. So choosing randomly any value for it would "break" both conservation of energy and angular momentum. The resultant world line is the one that both are conserved simultaneously.
 
  • #13
hi azabak! :smile:
azabak said:
… Then willem2 cleared me that it can only happen for a certain defined values of the radius.

no he didn't, he only said that you can't choose all three of v r and R …

once you choose two of them, the third is automatically decided because energy and angular momentum are conserved
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
7K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
16K