I Degrees of Freedom in Lagrangian Mechanics for a Fractal Path

AI Thread Summary
In Lagrangian mechanics, a degree of freedom along a tame curve like a parabola is straightforwardly one. However, the concept becomes complex when considering space-filling curves, as not all motions are feasible along these paths. The discussion raises the question of whether a fractal's non-integer dimension implies a non-integer degree of freedom, particularly when motion is confined to a nowhere differentiable curve. The boundary of the Mandelbrot Set, with a Hausdorff Dimension of 2, complicates the understanding of degrees of freedom, suggesting they may still be effectively one. Additionally, the inability to compute certain differentials along these curves introduces a geometric ambiguity reminiscent of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.
Pikkugnome
Messages
23
Reaction score
6
TL;DR Summary
Degree of freedom along a strange curve from lagrangian mechanics point of view.
Degree of freedom along a parabola, or any such tame curve, is one from lagrangian mechanics point of view. It makes sense. However how does degree of freedom accompany a space filling curve. Intuitively degree of freedom is not two, since not all motions are possible along the curve. How would lagrangian mechanics work on a such curve. A fractal can have a non integer dimension, would that make its degree of freedom also a non integer.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
How does Lagrangian mechanics work if motion is confined to a curve which is nowhere differentiable, as a fractal curve almost certainly is?
 
That's an interesting question.

The boundary to the Mandelbrot Set has a Hausdorff Dimension of 2 (as demonstrated here - jstor.org). That's an integer - but still a problem because it's the "wrong" integer. (The standard dimension of a curve enclosing an area is one.). Moreover, I expect that given any complex (r,i) coordinate on that curve, a dr and di (or dx,dy if you prefer) can be determined. If that's true, then the degrees of freedom would seem to be solid equal to one.

But it is also interesting if the dr,di cannot be computed. It would a geometric example of something inherently undefined - reminiscent of HUP.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Back
Top