How Does Substituting Functions into a Lagrangian Affect Equations of Motion?

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
4 replies · 3K views
Petr Mugver
Messages
279
Reaction score
0
Suppose I have a mechanical system with l + m degrees of freedom and an associated lagrangian

[itex]L(\alpha,\beta,\dot{\alpha},\dot{\beta},t)[/itex]

where [itex]\alpha\in\mathbb{R}^l[/itex] and [itex]\beta\in\mathbb{R}^m[/itex].
Now suppose I have a known [itex]\mathbb{R}^l[/itex]-valued function f(t) and define a new lagrangian

[itex]M(\beta,\dot{\beta},t)=L(f(t),\beta,\dot{f}(t), \dot{\beta},t)[/itex]

Do the equations that derive from M correctly describe the motion of the initial mechanical system, where the first l degrees of freedom are constrained to the motion f(t) (by means of an external force)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[tex]\frac{\partial L}{\partial q} = \frac{d}{dt} \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q} }[/tex]
where q is anyone of the coordinates of [itex]\alpha[/itex] or [itex]\beta[/itex] (i.e. there are l+m separate equations).
From this, I would assume that [itex]M(\beta , \dot{\beta} , t)[/itex] would be correct, because this simply gives the m equations, which correspond to [itex]\beta[/itex].
(I know I've not done a rigorous proof or anything, but this seems to make sense to me).
 
BruceW said:
[tex]\frac{\partial L}{\partial q} = \frac{d}{dt} \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q} }[/tex]
where q is anyone of the coordinates of [itex]\alpha[/itex] or [itex]\beta[/itex] (i.e. there are l+m separate equations).
From this, I would assume that [itex]M(\beta , \dot{\beta} , t)[/itex] would be correct, because this simply gives the m equations, which correspond to [itex]\beta[/itex].
(I know I've not done a rigorous proof or anything, but this seems to make sense to me).

Uhm, please don't let me write the formula, but when you take the derivative with respect to t of the momentum dM/dv, don't you get extra terms due to f(t) and df(t)/dt?
 
Do the equations that derive from M correctly describe the motion of the initial mechanical system, where the first l degrees of freedom are constrained to the motion f(t) (by means of an external force)?
Yes, this is correct. In fact it's done all the time: write down T and V as if the particles were entirely free, and then impose the constraints on them. The Lagrangian M you get from this will describe the motion of the constrained system.

What you cannot do is the other way around: trying to substitute f(t) into the equations of motion you originally derived from L.
 
Bill_K said:
Yes, this is correct. In fact it's done all the time: write down T and V as if the particles were entirely free, and then impose the constraints on them. The Lagrangian M you get from this will describe the motion of the constrained system.

What you cannot do is the other way around: trying to substitute f(t) into the equations of motion you originally derived from L.

Yes, it sounds so obvious. I feel stupid now... :)