Leonard Susskind : Classical Mechanics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Leonard Susskind's lecture on classical mechanics, specifically focusing on the differentiation of the square of the first derivative of position with respect to time. Participants are analyzing Susskind's claims and the application of the chain rule in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions Susskind's claim that the derivative of the first derivative squared is simply 2x'', suggesting it should be 2x'x''.
  • Another participant argues that Susskind assumes X(t), indicating that 'x' is a function of time, and thus the chain rule is applicable.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that Susskind may not be using the chain rule correctly, asserting that if x is solely a function of time, the derivative should be expressed as 2dx/dt * d^2x/dt^2.
  • One participant references the Euler-Lagrange equations to clarify the context of the discussion, emphasizing that the left-hand side involves the time derivative of the derivative of the Lagrangian with respect to coordinate velocity.
  • Another participant notes that a previous question on this topic had been answered in another thread, indicating ongoing confusion or interest in the subject matter.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of Susskind's application of the chain rule and the differentiation process, indicating that multiple competing views remain without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific aspects of Susskind's lecture and the Euler-Lagrange equations, but there are unresolved mathematical steps and assumptions regarding the treatment of variables and derivatives.

Physics news on Phys.org
isn't the derivative of the first derivative squared:
d/dt (x')^2 = 2x'x''? why does susskind claim it is 2x'', in his classical lecture 3?
 
he assumes X(t) so 'x' is a function of time not only of x , he is using the chain rule
 
Ithink he is not using the chain rule properly. if x is a function of time only, d/dt (dx/dt)^2 = 2dx/dt * d^2x/dt^2
 
lolgarithms said:
Ithink he is not using the chain rule properly. if x is a function of time only, d/dt (dx/dt)^2 = 2dx/dt * d^2x/dt^2

You've already asked this question, and had it answered in another thread. I don't know where abouts in the video you've seen this, but I'm guessing it has to do with the Euler-Lagrange equations:

<br /> \frac{d}{dt}\Big(\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial\dot{x}}\Big)=\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial x}

So, the LHS is not taking the time derivative of the Lagrangian, but is instead the time derivative of the derivative of the Lagrangian with respect to the coordinate velocity. It is important to treat the coordinate velocity as a variable; that is \mathcal{L}\equiv\mathcal{L}(x, \dot{x}).

If this doesn't clear things up, let me know the exact time in the video that you're confused with, and I'll try and look at it.
 
cristo said:
You've already asked this question, and had it answered in another thread.

I had the thread deleted because i decided I wanted to post it here.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K