Defining a Lagrangian in an rotating reference frame frame

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around defining a Newtonian Lagrangian in a rotating reference frame, specifically addressing the challenges and corrections needed for time derivatives in such frames. Participants explore the implications of fictitious forces and the formulation of equations of motion derived from the Lagrangian approach.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a Lagrangian of the form L = (1/2) m(𝑑𝑥/dt + 𝜔 × 𝑥)², expecting to derive three fictitious forces: centrifugal, centripetal, and Euler forces.
  • Another participant asks for clarification on the equation of motion being derived.
  • A participant shares their derived equation of motion, which includes terms for acceleration and fictitious forces, but questions the agreement with their initial Lagrangian formulation.
  • One participant concludes that the temporal derivative should be the ordinary derivative, not the corrected one, as the velocity is already defined in the rotating frame.
  • A later post introduces a new Lagrangian that includes a translation term, but notes that it does not yield the expected results, suggesting that the translation term does not transform appropriately in a rotating frame.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correct formulation of the Lagrangian and the resulting equations of motion. There is no consensus on the correct approach, and multiple competing ideas are presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for careful consideration of how terms transform in rotating frames, particularly regarding the treatment of velocity and additional translation terms. The discussion remains open regarding the formulation of a Lagrangian that accommodates both rotation and translation.

mtak0114
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
Hi
I'm trying to define a Newtonian lagrangian in an
rotating reference frame (with no potential)

Something to note is that the time derivative of in a rotating reference frame must be corrected for by:

\frac{d {\bf B}}{dt} \rightarrow \frac{d {\bf B}}{dt} + {\bf \omega} \times {\bf B}

where B is some vector, this can be found in wikipedia

Therefore I get something like

L = \frac{1}{2} m(\dot{{\bf x}}+{\bf \omega} \times {\bf x})^2

where the dot is the time derivative
and I am expecting to get three ficticious forces: Centrifugal, centripetal and euler forces.
but this does not appear what am I doing wrong?

I believe the answer should be

m(\ddot{{\bf x}}+2{\bf \omega} \times \dot{{\bf x}}+\dot{{\bf \omega}} \times {\bf x}+{\bf\omega \times (\omega} \times {\bf x}))=0

I get this by taking the Newtonian lagrangian in a non rotating frame and calculating the euler lagrange equations of motion, and then transforming into the rotating frame. but the two results do not agree?

any help would be greatly appreciated :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is the equation of motion that you're getting?
 
This is the equation of motion I'm getting is:

m(\ddot{{\bf x}}+2{\bf \omega} \times \dot{{\bf x}}+\dot{{\bf \omega}} \times {\bf x}+{\bf\omega \times (\omega} \times {\bf x}))+m {\bf \omega} \times(\dot{{\bf x}}+{\bf \omega} \times {\bf x})=0

thanks

M
 
Ive work it out :smile:

the temporal derivative is the ordinary temporal derivative not the corrected one because this is the velocity which is already defined in the rotating frame of reference

thanks again

M
 
I think I've work it out:

the temporal derivative is the ordinary temporal derivative not the corrected one because this is the velocity which is already defined in the rotating frame of reference.
now this gives the correct equations of motion

Now if I choose an arbitrary frame of reference i.e. one that is rotating and translating
this does not work, i.e. if I choose a lagrangian:

L = \frac{1}{2} m(\dot{{\bf x}}+{\bf \omega} \times {\bf x}+\tau)^2

but this does not work.

I think this is because the translation term \tau is an object that does not transform like the coordinates x when in a rotating frame... The correct result should be the original plus

\ddot{\tau}

should there be a lagrangian for such a frame?

cheers

M
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K