Expressing the Hamilitonian in c.o.m. coordinates

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mechdude
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coordinates
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around expressing the Hamiltonian of a diatomic molecule in center of mass (c.o.m.) coordinates. The original poster is tasked with transforming a classical Hamiltonian involving two atoms, A and B, into a form that separates the kinetic energy contributions from the overall motion of the molecule and the relative motion of the atoms.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the need to express the original Hamiltonian in terms of center of mass coordinates and relative coordinates. The original poster seeks clarification on how to derive the terms in the transformed Hamiltonian, particularly the kinetic energy associated with the center of mass motion.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided algebraic suggestions for substituting the original coordinates with the center of mass and relative coordinates. The original poster has made progress in understanding the relative motion but is still uncertain about incorporating the center of mass motion into the Hamiltonian.

Contextual Notes

The original poster indicates that this problem is part of a class assignment and expresses difficulty recalling the necessary steps from previous coursework. There is an implication that the center of mass is assumed to be fixed in some discussions, which may affect the understanding of the kinetic energy terms.

Mechdude
Messages
108
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


first this is indeed a class assignment , but for some reason i can not remember how to do it since its a review fro a previous semesters course.
here it is
Consider a diatomic molecule with a toms labelled A and B and witha classical Hamilitonian given by

[tex]H =\frac{1}{2} M_A (\dot{x}^2_A + \dot{y}^2_A + \dot{z}^2_A ) + \frac{1}{2} M_B (\dot{x}^{2}_{B} + \dot{y}^{2}_{B} + \dot{z}^{2}_{B}) + V(\vec{r})[/tex]
where [itex]r = \left[ (x_A - x_B)^2 + (y_A-y_B)^2 + (z_A-z_B)^2 \right]^\frac{1}{2}[/itex] is the distance between the atoms and [itex]\vec{r_A} = (x_A,y_B,z_B)[/itex] and [itex]\vec{r_B} = (x_B,,y_B,z_B)[/itex] are vectors that locate each atom.

a ) Show using the variable [itex]R= (X,Y,Z)[/itex] and [itex]\vec{r} = (x,y,z)[/itex] defined by [itex]R = \frac{(m_A \vec{r_A} + m_B \vec{r_B})}{m_A + m_B}[/itex] and [itex]\vec{r} = \vec{r_A} - \vec{r_B}[/itex] that

[tex]H = \frac{1}{2}M (\dot{X}^2 + \dot{Y}^2 + \dot{Z}^2 ) + \frac{1}{2} \mu (\dot{x}^2 +\dot{y}^2 + \dot{z}^2 ) + V(\vec{r}) [/tex]
where [itex]M =m_A + m_B[/itex] and [itex]\frac{m_A m_B}{ m_A + m_B }[/itex]


Homework Equations


Newtons laws


The Attempt at a Solution



i really need a clue to get started
but i think my problem is getting the total energy in c.o.m. coordinates, i can not figure out where the second term in the c.o.m. hamilitonian comes from.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The original form of the Hamiltonian is written in terms of [tex]\vec{r}_A, \vec{r}_B[/tex]. Solve for those in terms of [tex]\vec{R}, \vec{r}[/tex] and substitute. The algebra is not bad.
 
Mechdude said:
but i think my problem is getting the total energy in c.o.m. coordinates, i can not figure out where the second term in the c.o.m. hamilitonian comes from.
The first term is the kinetic energy due to the molecule moving as a whole. The second term is the kinetic energy due to the relative motion of the atoms within the molecule.
 
vela said:
The first term is the kinetic energy due to the molecule moving as a whole. The second term is the kinetic energy due to the relative motion of the atoms within the molecule.

thanks but after "staring" at the problem for a while, this is what i did:
[tex]m_A \vec{r}_A + m_B \vec{r}_B =0[/tex]
[tex]\vec{r} = \vec{r}_A + \vec{r}_B[/tex]
from the above two :
[tex]\vec{r}_A = \frac{m_B}{m_A + m_B} \vec{r}[/tex]
[tex]\vec{r}_B = -\frac{m_A}{m_A + m_B} \vec{r}[/tex]

[tex]\dot{ \vec{r}}_A = \frac{m_B}{m_A + m_B}\dot{ \vec{r}}[/tex]
[tex]\dot{ \vec{r}}_B = -\frac{m_B}{m_A + m_B}\dot{ \vec{r}}[/tex]

squaring and substituting into the classical Hamiltonian (first equation in my post above)
[tex]H = \frac{m_A m_{B}^2}{2 (m_A + m_B)^2} \dot{r}^2 + \frac{m_B m_{A}^2}{2 (m_A + m_B)^2} \dot{r}^2 + V(r)[/tex]

[tex]H = \frac{m_A m_B}{2 (m_A + m_B)^2} \dot{r}^2 [m_B + m_A] + V(r)[/tex]

[tex]H = \frac{m_A m_B}{2 (m_A + m_B)} \dot{r}^2 + V(r)[/tex]

[tex]H = \frac{1}{2 } \mu \dot{r}^2 + V(r)[/tex]

this looks like the second term of the target answer , at first i thought this is what i could not get , now it seems its the first term in the target answer that i can't obtain( or think of a way of getting there -since simply adding the term to the equation seems illegitimate) , to quote you
vela said:
The first term is the kinetic energy due to the molecule moving as a whole.
this i can't figure out how to factor into the expression
 
Last edited:
Your equation

[tex] m_A \vec{r}_A + m_B \vec{r}_B =0[/tex]

is saying the center of mass of the molecule is fixed at R=0. That's why you don't get the first term. If the molecule isn't moving, the only kinetic energy there is is due to the relative motion of the atoms.
 
so this
[tex] <br /> m_A \vec{r}_A + m_B \vec{r}_B =0<br /> [/tex]

ought to be replaced by some other expression that accounts for the motion of the com?
 
Yes, by this one which was given to you

[tex]R = \frac{(m_A \vec{r_A} + m_B \vec{r_B})}{m_A + m_B}[/tex]
 
thanks i'd not yet seen that, now the problem looks a lot more doable .i'l work on it
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K