Potentials of conservative forces

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
4 replies · 1K views
Kashmir
Messages
466
Reaction score
74
Goldstein writes

"only if ##V## is not an explicit function of time is the system conservative"That means ##V(r,\dot{r})## is a conservative potential, however I think that only potentials of the form ##V(r)## are conservative potentials.

Could you please tell me where I'm going wrong.

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
PeroK said:
There's a discussion here about whether the magnetic force is conservative or not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_force

And, there is plenty of further discussion online.
If we define a conservative force those whose closed loop integral is zero, then ##V(r,\dot{r})## isn't conservative?
That's the definition the author began with.
 
Kashmir said:
If we define a conservative force those whose closed loop integral is zero, then ##V(r,\dot{r})## isn't conservative?
That's the definition the author began with.
I'm not familiar with Goldstein, so I'm not sure what he's up to!
 
I'd not call ##V(\vec{x},\dot{\vec{x}})## a potential, but that's only a semantic question.

The math simply is that the first variation of the action is invariant under time translations if the Lagrangian is not explicitly time dependent, and then the Hamilotonian,
$$H=\dot{q}^k p_k - L=\text{const}$$
along the solutions of the Euler-Lagrange equations of motion, where the canonical momenta are defined by
$$p_k=\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}^k}.$$