Is There a Mistake in Goldstein's Mechanics on Cos Theta Definition?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mjordan2nd
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Error Goldstein
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a potential error in the definition of cos theta as presented in Goldstein's Mechanics, specifically in the context of a problem involving a solid hemisphere and a mass sliding down its surface. Participants are examining the implications of this definition in relation to the calculations that follow in the text.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant identifies a possible error in Goldstein's definition of cos theta, suggesting it should be z/a instead of x/z based on the context provided in the problem.
  • Another participant agrees with the first, indicating that the definition appears to be a typo if the subsequent calculations are correct.
  • A third participant challenges the initial claim, stating that cos theta cannot equal x/z and raises concerns about the validity of the expression a - √(x² - z²) = 0 for certain angles.
  • A later reply acknowledges a mistake in the notation regarding the square root, clarifying that it should have been a positive sign instead of negative.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correct definition of cos theta, with multiple competing views presented regarding the interpretation of the text and the implications of the calculations.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions and conditions under which the mathematical expressions are valid, particularly concerning the angles involved in the problem.

mjordan2nd
Messages
173
Reaction score
1
Hello,

I have the third edition of Goldstein which I have been using to learn mechanics. I believe I have found an error in the book, however normally when I feel such things I tend to either be misreading the situation or misunderstanding the concept. I checked Professor Safko's site on Goldstein corrections but it made no mention of the error I believe I caught. Also, I am not sure what printing of the edition I have. The method for ascertaining the printing edition on the professor's site does not seem to apply to the book I have, but again it is possible that I am missing something obvious. However, since Professor Safko's site was last updated in 2010, and I very recently bought the book, I thought perhaps I have a more recent printing than those presented on Dr. Safko's site.

That said, here's the issue. Beginning on pg. 47 in my book, the first two paragraphs state:

As an example, consider a smooth solid hemisphere of radius a placed with its flat side down and fastened to the Earth whose gravitational acceleration is g. Place a small mass M at the top of the hemisphere with an infinitesimal displacement off center so the mass slides down without friction. Choose coordinates x, y, z centered on the base of the hemisphere with z vertical and the x-z plane containing the initial motion of the mass.

Let [itex]\theta[/itex] be the angle from the top of the sphere to the mass. The Lagrangian is [itex]L = \frac{1}{2}M(\dot{x}^2 + \dot{y}^2 + \dot{z}^2)-mgz[/itex]. The initial condition allows us to ignore the y coordinate, so the constraint is [itex]a-\sqrt{x^2-z^2}=0[/itex]. Expressing the problem in terms of [itex]r^2=x^2+z^2[/itex] and [itex]x/z = cos \theta[/itex], Lagrange's equations are . . . . .

My objection to this is the book's definition of cos theta. It appears to me that based on what has been written cos theta should be z/a. Am I wrong in this? I don't think so, because the calculation directly following this seems to coincide with the way I'm thinking about it. Please let me know if I'm off base here.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
##cos(\theta)=\frac{z}{a}##, indeed.
Probably some weird typo, if the calculation afterwards is correct.
 
mjordan2nd said:
My objection to this is the book's definition of cos theta. It appears to me that based on what has been written cos theta should be z/a. Am I wrong in this? I don't think so, because the calculation directly following this seems to coincide with the way I'm thinking about it. Please let me know if I'm off base here.
Not only is [itex]\cos\theta \ne x/z[/itex] but [itex]a - \sqrt{x^2-z^2} \ne 0[/itex]. In fact [itex]\sqrt{x^2-z^2}[/itex] is not real for [itex]\theta<\pi/4[/itex]

AM
 
Thanks, that clears things up for me.

Also, the - in the square root was my fault. It should have read +.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
408
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K