Equation of motion from given 2D Potential

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the equations of motion for a particle in a two-dimensional potential energy function V(##\vec{r}##) = ½ k (x² + 4y²). The initial conditions provided are x = a, y = 0, x' = 0, and y' = v₀. Participants clarify that the force is derived from the gradient of the potential, leading to the expression ##\vec{F}## = -k( x ##\hat{x}## + 4y ##\hat{y}##). The equations of motion are then determined as X(t) = a cos(√(k/m) t) and Y(t) = (v₀/√(4k/m)) sin(√(4k/m) t). The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly applying vector calculus to solve the problem.
Adoniram
Messages
93
Reaction score
6

Homework Statement


A particle of mass m moves in two dimensions under the following potential energy
function:
V(##\vec{r}##) = ½ k (x2 + 4y2)

Find the resulting motion, given the initial condition at t=0:
x = a, y = 0, x' = 0, y' = vo

Homework Equations


F = ma = -dV/dr

The Attempt at a Solution


This will obviously involve a 2nd order diff eq, and there are enough initial conditions to solve for the unknown constants. If the potential were given with the r variable instead of x and y, it would be simpler. As such, I'm not sure how to take dV/dr when V is V(x,y) not V(r)...

If I use x = r Cosθ, y = r Sinθ, I can put it as:
V(##\vec{r}##) = (3/2) k r2 Sin2θ

But now that I have θ in the formula, is it ok to take dV/dr as such and set it in F = -dV/dr?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are doing it the wrong way, there are vector involved and ##\frac{d}{d \vec r} = \nabla ## and everyone already says it: force is the gradient of the potential, can you work it out now ?
[Edit: In case I wasn't clear, ##\nabla = \lt \frac{\partial}{\partial x}, \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \gt ## ]
 
*facepalm* Thank you!

##\vec{F}## = -k( x ##\hat{x}## + 4y ##\hat{y}##)

Then set to m##\vec{a}## = m(##\ddot{x}## ##\hat{x}## + ##\ddot{y}## ##\hat{y}##), and compare associated vector components... yes?
 
Just tried that, for anyone who wants to check:

X(t) = a ##\cos##(##\sqrt{k/m} t##)

Y(t) =##\frac{v_{o}}{\sqrt{4k/m}}\sin(\sqrt{4k/m} t)##
 
  • Like
Likes Noctisdark
At first, I derived that: $$\nabla \frac 1{\mu}=-\frac 1{{\mu}^3}\left((1-\beta^2)+\frac{\dot{\vec\beta}\cdot\vec R}c\right)\vec R$$ (dot means differentiation with respect to ##t'##). I assume this result is true because it gives valid result for magnetic field. To find electric field one should also derive partial derivative of ##\vec A## with respect to ##t##. I've used chain rule, substituted ##\vec A## and used derivative of product formula. $$\frac {\partial \vec A}{\partial t}=\frac...
Thread 'Conducting Sphere and Dipole Problem'
Hi, I'm stuck at this question, please help. Attempt to the Conducting Sphere and Dipole Problem (a) Electric Field and Potential at O due to Induced Charges $$V_O = 0$$ This potential is the sum of the potentials due to the real charges (##+q, -q##) and the induced charges on the sphere. $$V_O = V_{\text{real}} + V_{\text{induced}} = 0$$ - Electric Field at O, ##\vec{E}_O##: Since point O is inside a conductor in electrostatic equilibrium, the electric field there must be zero...