Lagrangian for the Kepler Problem

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Philosophaie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Kepler Lagrangian
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the Lagrangian for the Kepler Problem, which involves a two-body system in classical mechanics. Participants explore the formulation of the Lagrangian, the kinetic and potential energies involved, and the implications of angular momentum conservation in the context of planetary motion.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the Lagrangian can be derived from the position vector given in a two-body solution, but others challenge this by stating that it implies linear motion without acceleration.
  • One participant suggests that the Lagrangian can be expressed as $$\mathscr{L} = \frac{1}{2}m(\dot{r}+ r \dot{\theta})^{2} - U(r)$$ where the potential energy is defined as $$U(r) = \frac{GMm}{r}$$.
  • Another participant mentions that the kinetic energy is $$T=\frac{m}{2} \dot{\vec{x}}^2$$ and provides a formulation in polar coordinates, leading to a Lagrangian of $$L=T-V=\frac{m}{2} (\dot{r}^2+ r^2 \dot{\varphi}^2 ) - \frac{G mM}{r}$$.
  • Some participants express confusion regarding the definitions and relationships of kinetic and potential energy, particularly questioning the dependence of potential energy on velocity.
  • There is a discussion about the conservation of angular momentum, with one participant noting that the trajectory of the planet is in a plane perpendicular to the angular momentum.
  • Participants also mention the possibility of deriving equations of motion and the types of trajectories (ellipses, parabolas, hyperbolas) that can result from the analysis.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the formulation of the Lagrangian and the definitions of kinetic and potential energy. There is no consensus on the correct approach or interpretation of the equations presented.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight that the potential energy should not depend on velocity, indicating a potential misunderstanding in earlier claims. The discussion also reflects varying levels of familiarity with the mathematical formalism involved in the Lagrangian mechanics of the Kepler Problem.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and enthusiasts of classical mechanics, particularly those interested in Lagrangian formulations and the dynamics of celestial bodies.

Philosophaie
Messages
456
Reaction score
0
In a two-body solution ( Kepler Problem) how do you find the Lagrangian, L, if the position vector is:

[tex]x = (v_x * t + x_0, v_y * t + y_0, v_z * t + z_0)[/tex]

Action from Wikipedia is:

[tex]S = \int_{t_1}^{t_2} L * dt[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Philosophaie said:
In a two-body solution ( Kepler Problem) how do you find the Lagrangian, L, if the position vector is:

[tex]x = (v_x * t + x_0, v_y * t + y_0, v_z * t + z_0)[/tex]
That is certainly not true for all t, as this would mean linear motion (no acceleration).

The Lagrangian can be found similar to all other Lagrangians for a particle moving in a potential, the potential is GMm/r where ##r=|x|##.
 
If the central mass is large enough, the Lagrangian is

$$\mathscr{L} = \frac{1}{2}m(\dot{r}+ r \dot{\theta})^{2} - U(r)$$

Plugging it into the Euler-Lagrange equation:

$$\frac{\partial \mathscr{L}}{\partial q} = \frac{d}{dt}\frac{\partial \mathscr{L}}{\partial \dot{q}}$$

For the radial component, we have ##m \ddot{r} = mr \dot{\theta}^{2}-U'(r)##. The ##\theta## component gives us ##0##, because ##\frac{\partial \mathscr{L}}{\partial \theta} = 0 = \frac{d}{dt}(mr^2 \dot{\theta})##, we can call ##mr^2 \dot{\theta} = L##

At this point, you can pretty much solve the equations of motion with respect to time to get the position.

I hope that wasn't too convoluted of an answer.

Edit: Here's a link you might be interested in reading: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-01sc-physics-i-classical-mechanics-fall-2010/central-force-motion/central-force-motion-and-the-kepler-problem/MIT8_01SC_coursenotes28.pdf
 
Last edited:
I found a solution for Classical Mechanics

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=kepler+problem

The Kinetic Energy came out to be [tex]\frac {1}{2} (\frac{dx}{dt})^2[/tex]
The Potential Energy came out to be [tex]\frac {\lambda}{\frac {dx}{dt}}[/tex]

Not sure what lambda is. Can someone explain?
 
Philosophaie said:
I found a solution for Classical Mechanics

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=kepler+problem

The Kinetic Energy came out to be [tex]\frac {1}{2} (\frac{dx}{dt})^2[/tex]
The Potential Energy came out to be [tex]\frac {\lambda}{\frac {dx}{dt}}[/tex]

Not sure what lambda is. Can someone explain?

None of that is correct. First, Kepler's problem is usually set in at least 2 dimensions. Second, the potential energy does not depend on velocity; it depends on displacement.
 
Last edited:
Philosophaie said:
I found a solution for Classical Mechanics

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=kepler+problem

The Kinetic Energy came out to be [tex]\frac {1}{2} (\frac{dx}{dt})^2[/tex]
The Potential Energy came out to be [tex]\frac {\lambda}{\frac {dx}{dt}}[/tex]

Not sure what lambda is. Can someone explain?

I've got no idea what you're doing.

Look, the Lagrangian IS the kinetic minus the potential. ##\mathscr{L} = KE - U##

In the Kepler Problem, where ##M >> m## $$\mathscr{L} = \frac{1}{2}m(\dot{r}+ r \dot{\theta})^{2} - \frac{GMm}{r}$$

As Voko says, this can be reduced to a one dimensional problem by playing noting that ---->

$$\frac{\partial \mathscr{L}}{\partial \theta} = 0 = \frac{d}{dt}(mr^2 \dot{\theta})$$ where we can set ##mr^2 \dot{\theta} = L## and play with the equations from here.

What EXACTLY are you trying to figure out? State your question CLEARLY, because I don't have a clue what you're asking for.
 
The potential is spherically symmetric and thus angular momentum is conserved. The trajectory of the planet thus is in a plane perpendicular to the angular momentum and thus in a plane.

The kinetic energy is
[tex]T=\frac{m}{2} \dot{\vec{x}}^2.[/tex]
Using polar coordinates in the plane perpendicular to angular momentum
[tex]\vec{x}=r \begin{pmatrix} \cos \varphi \\ \sin \varphi \end{pmatrix},[/tex]
you get
[tex]T=\frac{m}{2} (\dot{r}^2+ r^2 \dot{\varphi}^2).[/tex]
The Lagrangian thus is
[tex]L=T-V=\frac{m}{2} (\dot{r}^2+ r^2 \dot{\varphi}^2 )+ \frac{G mM}{r}.[/tex]
Now you see that [itex]\varphi[/itex] is cyclic and thus
[tex]J=\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{\varphi}}=m r^2 \dot{\varphi}=\text{const}.[/tex]
This is the conservation of angular momentum in this special frame of reference.

Rewriting the equation of motion for [itex]r[/itex] using this first integral as a function of [itex]\varphi[/itex] and doing the substitution [itex]s=1/r[/itex] you get an easy to solve differential equation, leading to ellipses, parabolas, or hyperbolas as trajectories.

The case [itex]J=0[/itex] has to be discussed separately.
 
Thanx
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K