Motion on a Paraboloid: Reduce to Quadratures

  • Thread starter Thread starter neworder1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Motion Paraboloid
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a body of mass M moving in a gravitational field on the inner surface of a paraboloid defined by the equation z = (1/2a)(x² + y²). The task is to reduce the motion to quadratures without providing a complete solution.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the use of Lagrange equations and transformations to polar coordinates to derive equations of motion. There are attempts to separate variables and integrate the resulting equations. Questions arise regarding the dependence of constants on initial conditions and the validity of the derived equations.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively exploring different approaches to the problem, including the use of Lagrange multipliers and polar transformations. Some express uncertainty about the integration process and the correctness of their equations. There is no explicit consensus on the correctness of the methods used, but guidance is offered regarding checking calculations against different approaches.

Contextual Notes

The problem is constrained by the requirement to use specific methods (i.e., Lagrange multipliers) as per the formulation, which may influence the complexity of the solutions derived.

neworder1
Messages
64
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A body of mass M moves (in a gravitational field g) on the inner surface of given by equation:

[tex]z=\frac{1}{2a}(x^{2}+y^{2})[/tex]

(a is positive)

Reduce the question of finding the motion to quadratures.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I used Lagrange equations (1st kind) to find relevant equations for x, y and z, and after separating variables, transformation to polar coordinates [tex](r, \phi, z)[/tex] etc. I came up with the following equation (C is a constant dependent on initial conditions):

[tex]\ddot{r}-\frac{C}{r^{3}}=-\frac{1}{a^{2}}(r{\dot{r}}^{2}+r^{2}\ddot{r})-\frac{g}{a}r[/tex]

I don't have any idea how to integrate this equation, but maybe I've done things in an unnecessarily complicated way...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
neworder1 said:
I used Lagrange equations (1st kind) to find relevant equations for x, y and z, and after separating variables, transformation to polar coordinates [tex](r, \phi, z)[/tex] etc. I came up with the following equation (C is a constant dependent on initial conditions):

[tex]\ddot{r}-\frac{C}{r^{3}}=-\frac{1}{a^{2}}(r{\dot{r}}^{2}+r^{2}\ddot{r})-\frac{g}{a}r[/tex]

I don't have any idea how to integrate this equation, but maybe I've done things in an unnecessarily complicated way...

I get a slightly different equation in r.

Since

[tex]L = \frac{m}{2}\left(\dot{r}^2 + r^2 \dot{\theta}^2 + \dot{z}^2 \right) - mgz[/tex]

and

[tex]z=\frac{r^2}{a^2}[/tex]

[tex]\dot{z} = \frac{r \dot{r}}{a}[/tex]

and using

[tex]\frac{\partial L}{\partial \theta} = 0 = \frac{d}{dt}\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{\theta}}[/tex]

[tex]\frac{\partial L}{\partial r} = \frac{d}{dt}\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{r}}[/tex]

I get

[tex]\frac{r \dot{r}}{a^2} -\frac{gr}{a} = \ddot{r} + \frac{2\dot{r}^2 + r^2 \ddot{r}}{a^2}[/tex]

How does the constant depending on the initial condition (which should be the component of the angular momentum, I guess) come into the final equation for r?
 
The way I actually obtained that equation is the following: because the body moves on the surface given by:
[tex]f=z-\frac{1}{2a}(x^{2}+y^{2})=0[/tex]

,the reaction force must be proportional to the constraint function's gradient, i.e.:

[tex]F_{r}=\lambda\nabla{f}[/tex] (Lagrange multipliers). So I get 3 equations:

[tex]m\ddot{x}=-\lambda\frac{x}{a}[/tex]

[tex]m\ddot{y}=-\lambda\frac{y}{a}[/tex]

[tex]m\ddot{z}=-mg+\lambda[/tex]

Using polar transformation leads to:

[tex]\ddot{x}=\ddot{r}cos\phi-2\dot{r}\dot{\phi}sin\phi-r\ddot{\phi}sin\phi-r{\dot{\phi}}^{2}cos\phi[/tex]

[tex]\ddot{y}=\ddot{r}sin\phi+2\dot{r}\dot{\phi}cos\phi+r\ddot{\phi}cos\phi-r{\dot{\phi}}^{2}sin\phi[/tex]
[tex]z=\frac{1}{2a}r^{2}[/tex]

[tex]\ddot{z}=\frac{1}{a}({\dot{r}}^{2}+r\ddot{r})[/tex]

After plugging these expressions into the original equations (plus eliminating [tex]\lambda[/tex] using [tex]z[/tex]) I get two new equations (1) and (2) for [tex]r[/tex] and [tex]\phi[/tex]. Our aim is to separate variables, so I do the following trick:

[tex](1)cos\phi+(2)sin\phi[/tex]
[tex](1)sin\phi-(2)cos\phi[/tex]

and I get another two equations:

[tex](1') \ddot{r}-r{\dot{\phi}}^{2}=-\frac{1}{a^{2}}(r{\dot{r}}^{2}+r\ddot{r})-\frac{g}{a}r[/tex]
[tex](2') 2\dot{r}\dot{\phi}+r\ddot{\phi}[/tex]

(2') is easily integrable and yields:
[tex]\dot{\phi}=\frac{C}{r^{2}}[/tex].

Plugging this into (1') results in the equation I've written in my first post.

Is there a mistake somewhere in these calculations? I know that this can be done quicker by writing apropriate lagrangians etc., but the problem's formulation was to do everything using this method (i.e. Lagrange multipliers).
 
Last edited:
neworder1 said:
Is there a mistake somewhere in these calculations? I know that this can be done quicker by writing apropriate lagrangians etc., but the problem's formulation was to do everything using this method (i.e. Lagrange multipliers).

I've not checked the calculations yet, but I think the final equation which describes the motion of r should be independent of the method. Since using the appropriate Lagrangian is much less time consuming, check if you get the same equation. That way, you'll know if there's a calculation error.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K