Period of simple orbit in central potential

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between the period of revolution T of a body in a central potential and the area A of its orbit, as presented in Symon's book 'Mechanics'. Participants explore the implications of this relationship and the validity of different approaches to deriving the formula.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the formula T = 2Am/L, suggesting that a different approach considering the area of a section of a circle might yield a more accurate relationship.
  • Another participant argues that the area swept out in time dt is not a right triangle and provides a correction involving the cross product to express the area in terms of angular momentum.
  • A third participant clarifies the distinction between their interpretation of the area S as a triangle versus a section, and presents their reasoning for the area calculation.
  • A later reply challenges the assumption that angular momentum can be simplified in the case of a variable radius, suggesting that the moment of inertia should be treated as a tensor quantity in such scenarios.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the original formula and the assumptions underlying their derivations. No consensus is reached, and multiple competing interpretations remain present.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their assumptions regarding the geometry of the area swept out and the treatment of angular momentum when the radius is not constant. These unresolved aspects contribute to the complexity of the discussion.

quasar987
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Messages
4,796
Reaction score
32
In Symon's book 'Mechanics', he writes that for a body of mass m and angular momentum L in an orbit that does not intersect itself (i.e. a simple curve), the period of revolution T is related to the area A of the orbit by

[tex]T=\frac{2Am}{L}[/tex]

Is this exact as he seems to be implying? It seems to me that the correct formula would be obtained by considering the area S of a section of circle, and saying that the area of the orbit is related to the period of revolution by

[tex]A=\int_0^T \frac{dS}{dt}dt = \int_0^T \frac{1}{2}r^2 \frac{d\theta}{dt}dt + \int_0^T \theta r\frac{dr}{dt}dt = \frac{L}{2m}\int_0^T dt + \int_0^T \theta r\frac{dr}{dt}dt = \frac{LT}{2m} + \int_0^T \theta r\frac{dr}{dt}dt[/tex]

Am I missing something?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
quasar987 said:
In Symon's book 'Mechanics', he writes that for a body of mass m and angular momentum L in an orbit that does not intersect itself (i.e. a simple curve), the period of revolution T is related to the area A of the orbit by

[tex]T=\frac{2Am}{L}[/tex]

Is this exact as he seems to be implying? It seems to me that the correct formula would be obtained by considering the area S of a section of circle, and saying that the area of the orbit is related to the period of revolution by

[tex]A=\int_0^T \frac{dS}{dt}dt = \int_0^T \frac{1}{2}r^2 \frac{d\theta}{dt}dt + \int_0^T \theta r\frac{dr}{dt}dt = \frac{L}{2m}\int_0^T dt + \int_0^T \theta r\frac{dr}{dt}dt = \frac{LT}{2m} + \int_0^T \theta r\frac{dr}{dt}dt[/tex]

Am I missing something?
The element of area swept out in time dt, where the radius is changing is not a right triangle. So the area dS is not 1/2 rdr. The area is [itex]1/2 rdr sin\beta[/itex] where [itex]\beta[/itex] is the angle that [itex]d\vec r[/itex] makes to [itex]\vec r[/itex]. In other words [itex]dS = 1/2 \vec r \times \vec{dr}[/itex]

Since:[itex]L = m\frac{d\vec{r}}{dt}\times \vec{r}[/itex]:

[tex]Area = \int_0^T \frac{dS}{dt}dt = \int_0^T \frac{1}{2}\vec{r}\times \frac{d\vec{r}}{dt}dt = \int_0^T \frac{L}{2m}dt = \frac{LT}{2m}[/tex]

AM
 
Last edited:
I see what you're doing. You're taking S as the area of a triangle, while I was taking S as the area of a section. I figure since the area of a section subtended by and angle [itex]\theta[/itex] is

[tex]S = \frac{1}{2}\theta r^2[/tex]

then

[tex]\frac{dS}{dt}=\frac{1}{2}r^2 \frac{d\theta}{dt} + r\frac{dr}{dt}\theta[/tex]

Why is this wrong?
 
i think the problem probably is, in your derivation you assumed that:

[tex]\vec{L}=\frac{1}{2}mr^2\frac{d\theta}{dt}[/tex]
which isn't valid when r is not constant. the moment of inertia should become a tensor quantity. Since in the above derivation, it is assumed that [tex]v=\omega r[/tex], however, when r is not constant, omeaga should be:
[tex]\omega=\frac{\vec{r}\times{\vec{v}}}{r^2}[/tex]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K