Is Phi a Generalized Coordinate in Lagrangian Equations?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter M. next
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lagrangian
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the role of the coordinate phi in Lagrangian mechanics, specifically whether phi can be considered a generalized coordinate when the Lagrangian does not depend on it. Participants explore implications for equations of motion and conservation laws in the context of generalized coordinates.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether phi can still be considered a generalized coordinate if the Lagrangian does not depend on it, seeking clarification on the implications of this situation.
  • Another participant explains that if the Lagrangian does not depend on phi, it implies that the conjugate momentum associated with phi is conserved, suggesting that phi remains a generalized coordinate despite the lack of dependence.
  • A further contribution discusses the scenario where the Lagrangian does not depend on the time derivative of phi, indicating that this would suggest a lack of dynamics in the phi direction, shifting focus to other coordinates like theta.
  • One participant provides an example involving a planet orbiting a star, illustrating that a lack of phi dependence in the potential energy leads to conservation of angular momentum, but does not reduce the dimensionality of the problem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether phi can be considered a generalized coordinate when the Lagrangian does not depend on it. Some argue it remains a generalized coordinate due to conservation laws, while others question its relevance in the equations of motion.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the implications of the Lagrangian's dependence on phi and its time derivative, but do not resolve the implications of these dependencies fully. The discussion includes assumptions about the nature of the potential energy and the dynamics involved.

M. next
Messages
380
Reaction score
0
If we considered some coordinate as being a generalized one, like when we are considering spherical coordinates-let us suppose that I chose theta and phi as generalized coordinates. After deriving the Lagrangian equation it turned out that the equation doesn't depend on phi. Which means that derivative of the Lagrangian by phi is zero. Does this mean it is not a generalized coordinate? If not, what does it mean? And lastly, what's the difference if the case was that the equation doesn't depend on phi dot(the time derivative of phi)
thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
M. next said:
If we considered some coordinate as being a generalized one, like when we are considering spherical coordinates-let us suppose that I chose theta and phi as generalized coordinates. After deriving the Lagrangian equation it turned out that the equation doesn't depend on phi. Which means that derivative of the Lagrangian by phi is zero. Does this mean it is not a generalized coordinate? If not, what does it mean? And lastly, what's the difference if the case was that the equation doesn't depend on phi dot(the time derivative of phi)
thanks in advance


Let's say we have some Lagrangian

[itex]L(\theta, \phi, \dot{\theta}, \dot{\phi})[/itex]

Let's look at the equation of motion for [itex]\phi[/itex]. Recall that the generalized conjugate momentum to the coordinate [itex]\phi[/itex] is

[itex]p_{\phi}=(\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{\phi}})[/itex]

and so our equation of motion becomes

[itex]\frac{d}{d t}(\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{\phi}}) -(\frac{\partial L}{\partial \phi}) = \frac{d}{d t} p_{\phi} - (\frac{\partial L}{\partial \phi})= 0[/itex]

If L does not depend on [itex]\phi[/itex], then [itex](\frac{\partial L}{\partial \phi})= 0[/itex], and so [itex]p_{\phi}[/itex] is constant in time; it is a conserved quantity.


As for what happens when L does not depend on [itex]\dot{\phi}[/itex] we can look to the same equation of motion. This would be saying the same thing as [itex]p_{\phi} = 0[/itex]. As far as dynamics go, I think what it means is that there would be no relevant dynamics in the [itex]\phi[/itex] direction, and you would instead look at how things are changing in the [itex]\theta[/itex] direction.


hope this helps,

-James
 
Phi is still a generalized coordinate, and when you're considering your final equations of motion you will need to consider the time-dependence of the phi coordinate in your answer.

The fact that the derivative of the Lagrangian is zero means, as was mentioned above, that you have a conserved quantity. For example, consider the Lagrangian for a small planet orbiting a very large star: assuming that Newtonian gravity is valid, you will get a potential energy that will have no angular dependence at all. If you were free to choose whatever reference frame you wanted, then you would be foolish not to choose one in which one of the generalized coordinates is zero. However, you can imagine a potential that is slightly more complicated in which there is no "phi" dependence, but some "theta" dependence (like the gravitational potential energy of a galactic disk). In this case, the fact that dL/d(phi) = 0 means that angular momentum is conserved about the axis of symmetry. This does not reduce the effective dimensionality of the solution set though.
 
I apologize for the REAL delay in replying, but I thank you both.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
450
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K