I Precession of a spherical top in orbit around a rotating star

etotheipi
Looking at L&L's solution to problem four of section §106. Lagrangian for a system of particles:\begin{align*}
L = &\sum_a \frac{m_a' v_a^2}{2} \left( 1 + 3\sum_{b}' \frac{km_b}{c^2 r_{ab}} \right) + \sum_a \frac{m_a v_a^4}{8c^2} + \sum_a \sum_b' \frac{km_a m_b}{2r_{ab}} \\

&- \sum_a \sum_b' \frac{km_a m_b}{4c^2 r_{ab}} \left[ 7 \mathbf{v}_a \cdot \mathbf{v}_b +(\mathbf{v}_a \cdot \mathbf{n}_{ab})(\mathbf{v}_b \cdot \mathbf{n}_{ab}) \right] - \sum_a \sum_b' \sum_c' \frac{k^2 m_a m_b m_c}{2c^2 r_{ab} r_{ac}}\end{align*}I think in the first approximation L&L are writing ##L = L_0 + \delta^{(1)}L + \delta^{(2)} L## with ##L_0 = \sum_a \frac{m_a v_a^2}{2}## and the first deviation ##\delta^{(1)}L## is arising from the term ##\sum_a \frac{m_a' v_a^2}{2} \sum_{b}' \frac{3km_b}{c^2 r_{ab}}##, where I guess they were considering something like\begin{align*}

\sum_{a \in \mathrm{top}} \sum_{b \in \mathrm{star}} \frac{3km_a m_b(\mathbf{V} + \boldsymbol{\omega} \times \mathbf{r})^2}{2c^2 r_{ab} } &\overset{\mathrm{continuum}}{\longrightarrow} \frac{3km'}{2c^2} \int_{\mathrm{top}} \frac{2}{R(\mathbf{r}')}(\mathbf{V} \cdot \boldsymbol{\omega} \times \mathbf{r}) dm\end{align*}having dropped the ##V^2## and neglecting anything in ##\omega^2##, also ##m'## is the mass of the star. It simplifies writing ##\int_{\mathrm{top}} x_i x_j dm = \frac{1}{2} I \delta_{ij}##. I don't know which term they used to write ##\delta^{(2)} L##; this second deviation is supposed to account for the rotation of the star; they say you can make use of the equation$$h_{03} = \frac{2kM'}{Rc^2} \sin^2{\theta}$$How do you use this? You're supposed to get$$\delta^{(2)} L = \frac{2k}{c^2} \int_{\mathrm{top}} \frac{\mathbf{M}' \cdot (\boldsymbol{\omega} \times \mathbf{r}) \times \mathbf{R}}{R^3} dm$$here ##\mathbf{M}'## is the angular momentum of the star. How do you arrive at this given the formula for ##h_{03}##? Very lost.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I wonder if it could be$$\delta^{(2)} L = -c \int h_{03} v(\mathbf{r}')^3 dm = - \frac{2k}{c} \int_{\mathrm{top}} \frac{M' v(\mathbf{r})^3 \sin^2{\theta}}{R} dm = \int_{\mathrm{top}} \frac{M' (\boldsymbol{\omega} \times \mathbf{r})^3 \sin^2{\theta}}{R} dm$$but given ##\mathbf{M}' \cdot (\boldsymbol{\omega} \times \mathbf{r}) \times \mathbf{R} = - \mathbf{M}' \cdot \mathbf{R} \times (\boldsymbol{\omega} \times \mathbf{r}) =-(\boldsymbol{\omega} \cdot \mathbf{M}')(\mathbf{R} \cdot \mathbf{r}) + (\boldsymbol{\omega} \cdot \mathbf{R})( \mathbf{r} \cdot \mathbf{M}')## it's not so clear how to show the two integrals are the same? Maybe there's some approximations being made?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top