Comparing Generalised Momentum Calculations for Central Force Problems

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding generalized momentum in the context of central force problems using the Lagrangian approach. The original poster presents a Lagrangian and attempts to relate it to angular momentum derived from a Newtonian perspective.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to reconcile the Lagrangian formulation of angular momentum with a Newtonian approach, questioning the validity of their assumptions and the differences in results.
  • Some participants question the applicability of certain equations, particularly in non-circular motion scenarios.
  • Others suggest that the Lagrangian is general and can accommodate various motion types beyond circular motion.
  • There are inquiries about the relationship between velocity, angle, and angular momentum in the context of the problem.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights and clarifications regarding the assumptions made by the original poster. Some guidance has been offered on how to express momentum in terms of relevant variables, but no consensus has been reached on the original poster's questions.

Contextual Notes

Participants are exploring the implications of using different formulations of momentum and the assumptions underlying those formulations. There is a recognition that the relationship between the vectors involved may vary depending on the motion type, which remains a point of contention.

WWCY
Messages
476
Reaction score
15

Homework Statement



I have an issue with understanding the idea of generalised momentum for the Lagrangian.

For a central force problem, the Lagrangian is given by,
$$L = \frac{1}{2}m(\dot{r} ^2 + p^2 \dot{\phi ^2}) - U(r)$$
with ##r## being radial distance.

The angular momentum is then,
$$P_{\phi} = \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{\phi}} = mr^2\dot{\phi}$$

Without the Lagrangian, I would have started with,
$$P_{\phi} = \vec{r} \times \vec{P}$$
$$|P_{\phi}| = rP\sin (\theta)$$
$$|P_{\phi}| = rmv \sin (\theta)$$
with ##\theta## being the angle between the two vectors, which I think can be reduced with the equation
$$v = r\dot{\phi}$$
and angular momentum is,
$$|P_{\phi}| = mr^2 \dot{\phi} \sin (\theta)$$
which varies significantly.

Could someone kindly
a) Explain the errors in my assumptions
b) Explain how I should have altered my "Newtonian" working in order to derive the same result as the Lagrangian method?

Thanks!

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
v = rφ' is true only when the v and r vectors are perpendicular, as in circular motion. More generally, rφ' = v sinθ.
 
mjc123 said:
v = rφ' is true only when the v and r vectors are perpendicular, as in circular motion. More generally, rφ' = v sinθ.

Hi, thanks for the response.

But this means that the particle in the Lagrangian problem has to be moving in a circular motion, which needn't be the case, no?
 
No, the Lagrangian is general (as shown by the term in r'2, which is 0 for circular motion.)
 
mjc123 said:
No, the Lagrangian is general (as shown by the term in r'2, which is 0 for circular motion.)

Do you mind explaining why ##v\sin \theta = r \dot{\phi}##?

Thank you.
 
diagram.png

Hope this helps
 

Attachments

  • diagram.png
    diagram.png
    2.4 KB · Views: 806
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: WWCY
mjc123 said:
View attachment 215433
Hope this helps

If you want to compare those two ways of calculating the momentum you need to express ##\vec{r} \times \vec{P}## completely in terms of ##r## and ##\phi## and their derivatives. Putting in the extra angle ##\theta## makes it hard to compare them.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K