I Hamilton’s principle maximises potential energy?

Click For Summary
Hamilton's principle minimizes the difference between kinetic energy and potential energy, effectively maximizing potential energy when kinetic energy is fixed. In scenarios where kinetic energy or mass is negligible, the Lagrangian simplifies to the negative of potential energy. The discussion references Feynman's explanation in his lectures, particularly around Fig 19-6, to illustrate these concepts. The limit of kinetic energy approaching zero raises questions about the meaningfulness of maximizing potential energy in this context. Ultimately, the focus remains on finding the path where the integral of kinetic and potential energy is extreme.
sentai
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
Hamilton’s principle minimises kinetic energy minus potential energy, that is, with a fixed kinetic energy, Hamilton's principle maximises potential energy. What if we consider the limit that the kinetic energy or the mass/the inertia can be ignored then the lagrangian is solely the negative of potential energy. How to understand the potential energy needs to be maximised?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
anuttarasammyak said:
Feynmann does a good explanation around Fig 19.3 in https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_19.html.
Thank you, however, I don't think he said anything about maximization of PE and its meaning?
 
Sorry, Fig 19-6 and its around explains it.
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2 and sentai
anuttarasammyak said:
Sorry, Fig 19-6 and its around explains it.
Thanks for pointing it out. Then how should we understand the limit of KE->0, then min(L)=-max(PE)?
 
As Feynman stated we are looking for the path KE-PE integral on which should be extreme.
KE=0 takes place at the top of trajectory in Fig 19-6 but I do not think considering such "limit of KE->0" is meaningful.
 
For fun I was trying to use energy considerations to determine the depth to which a solid object will sink in a fluid to reach equilibrium. The first approach that I tried was just to consider the change in potential energy of the block and the fluid as the block is lowered some unknown distance d into the fluid similar to what is shown in the answer to this post. Upon taking the limit as the vessel's cross sectional area approaches infinity I have an extra factor of 2 in the equilibrium...