Central Potential Repulsive Scattering

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the complexities of energy conservation in different inertial frames during central potential repulsive scattering. The initial energy equation, E = m1 * v0^2 / 2, is scrutinized alongside the effective potential energy, U_eff(r), and the concept of reduced mass, μ. The confusion arises from the assumption that m1 equals μ, which is incorrect. The conversation emphasizes the necessity of using the center of mass frame for accurate energy conservation analysis, as conservation laws are not invariant across all frames.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of classical mechanics principles, particularly energy conservation.
  • Familiarity with the concept of reduced mass in two-body problems.
  • Knowledge of inertial frames and their implications in physics.
  • Basic grasp of effective potential energy in central force problems.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of energy terms using reduced mass as outlined in "Classical Mechanics" by Goldstein.
  • Explore the concept of the center of mass frame in detail.
  • Investigate the implications of conservation laws in different inertial frames.
  • Review examples of central potential scattering problems to solidify understanding.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on classical mechanics, energy conservation, and two-body interactions in central potential fields.

ispivack
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
Consider two particles interacting via a repulsive central potential U(r) = k/r with k > 0. Find the minimal distance between particles, when one of them (with mass m1) is coming from infinity with initial velocity v0, and approaching an initially resting particle (with mass m2) with impact parameter ρ.
Relevant Equations
U(r) = k/r
I have one problem with this question that I've been struggling with. Initially, the total energy should be given by E =m1* v0^2/2 (as U goes to zero, and m2 is at rest). However, if we write r = r1 - r2, we get E = mu*rdot^2/2 + U_eff(r), U_eff(r) also goes to 0, where mu is the reduced mass. However, rdot^2 is exactly v0^2 when r is infinity, as rdot = r1dot - r2dot = r1dot, since m2 is at rest. This seems to imply that m1 = mu, which makes no sense. What am I missing? If I assume that the first energy I stated is incorrect, I have no trouble with the rest of the problem.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Simply because you have switched frames and illegally equated them. One frame is the 3rd observer,observing collision. In this frame,both particles are moving once they are sufficiently close to each other. Another frame is the frame of particle in which it is at rest and observing another particle coming towards him. These 2 frames coincide if the particle which was at rest, is too much heavy in which m=##\mu##.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2019-10-21-08-19-45.png
    Screenshot_2019-10-21-08-19-45.png
    16.4 KB · Views: 215
  • Screenshot_2019-10-21-08-19-30.png
    Screenshot_2019-10-21-08-19-30.png
    19.4 KB · Views: 206
When the particle m1 is infinitely far away, neither particle will have a force acting on it. So, both equations hold for the frame of the third observor, no?
 
Why do you think this is true? If I only have a single particle is its KE the same for observers in various inertial frames? Manifestly not.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Abhishek11235
ispivack said:
When the particle m1 is infinitely far away, neither particle will have a force acting on it. So, both equations hold for the frame of the third observor, no?
Succintly,If you follow derivation of energy term using reduced mass(c.f. Goldstein), you see,you have to go into the frame of centre of mass. Now,conservation of energy is "Conservation" law not invariant law. It need not be same in every frame!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hutchphd

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K