Finding a Conservative Force: Math Solutions

AI Thread Summary
A conservative force is defined as one where the work done is independent of the path taken, exemplified by gravitational force. To mathematically determine if a force is conservative, one can check if the work done around a closed loop is zero. Additionally, the curl of the force field must be zero for it to be classified as conservative. Clarifications on this topic can be found in the linked discussion. Understanding these principles is essential for analyzing forces in physics.
kthouz
Messages
188
Reaction score
0
how to find mathematically that a force is conservative?i know that a consrvative force is a force in which work done is independent of path followed such as gravitational force.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
please don't post it twice
 
Last edited:
if you have anything unclear,of course ,you can ask it in either of them.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
28
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
964
Replies
54
Views
6K
Back
Top