Proving Angular Momentum is Conserved with Euler's Equations

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the conservation of angular momentum using Euler's equations for a rigid body that is not subject to any torques. Participants are exploring the relationship between angular momentum and angular velocity in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to connect the absence of torque to the constancy of angular momentum through Euler's equations. Some participants provide the equations and suggest solving for angular velocities. Others raise questions about the relationship between angular momentum and angular velocity, particularly regarding their parallelism and the conditions under which this holds.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering insights into the nature of angular momentum and angular velocity. There is a recognition of the complexity involved in determining when these vectors are parallel, particularly in relation to the inertia tensor and its diagonalization. The discussion is ongoing, with various interpretations and approaches being explored.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on the assumptions underlying Euler's equations, particularly the condition of rotation about principal axes, which affects the relationship between angular momentum and angular velocity. Participants are also considering the implications of the inertia tensor's structure on the problem.

iacephysics
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
How do you prove that angular momentum is conserved by using Euler's equations, for a rigid body not subject to any torques?

I can show that angular momentum is constant because there's no torque acting on the body and no torque means no change in angular momentum.

But how do I show this with Euler's equations.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When you say Euler's equations for a rigid body with no external forces I assume you mean:


[tex](I_{2}-I_{3})\omega_{2}\omega_{3}-I_{1}{\dot{\omega_{1}}}=0[/tex]
[tex](I_{3}-I_{1})\omega_{3}\omega_{1}-I_{2}{\dot{\omega_{2}}}=0[/tex]
[tex](I_{1}-I_{2})\omega_{1}\omega_{2}-I_{3}{\dot{\omega_{3}}}=0[/tex]

Try solving for:

[tex]\omega_{1},\omega_{2},\omega_{3}[/tex]

Once you do that, compute

[tex]\omega=\sqrt{\omega_{1}^2+\omega_{2}^2+\omega_{3}^2}[/tex]

and see if the nature of that answer gives you enough insight to finish the problem.
 
dwintz02 said:
When you say Euler's equations for a rigid body with no external forces I assume you mean:


[tex](I_{2}-I_{3})\omega_{2}\omega_{3}-I_{1}{\dot{\omega_{1}}}=0[/tex]
[tex](I_{3}-I_{1})\omega_{3}\omega_{1}-I_{2}{\dot{\omega_{2}}}=0[/tex]
[tex](I_{1}-I_{2})\omega_{1}\omega_{2}-I_{3}{\dot{\omega_{3}}}=0[/tex]

Try solving for:

[tex]\omega_{1},\omega_{2},\omega_{3}[/tex]

Once you do that, compute

[tex]\omega=\sqrt{\omega_{1}^2+\omega_{2}^2+\omega_{3}^2}[/tex]

and see if the nature of that answer gives you enough insight to finish the problem.

[tex]\omega=\sqrt{\omega_{1}^2+\omega_{2}^2+\omega_{3}^2}[/tex] that tells me the magnitude of angular velocity, it could be constant, but its direction doesn't have to be. Plus angular momentum is not necessarily parallel to angular velocity, so more help please!
 
iacephysics said:
Plus angular momentum is not necessarily parallel to angular velocity, so more help please!

Right. When are L and w parallel? This one's tricky--they are parallel when the elements of the inertia tensor are diagonalized (all off diagonal elements are zero). This causes the inertia tensor to act as a 'constant' (I don't know the right word.) Check the matrix multiplication to see what I mean. If inertia is a 3x3 matrix and w is a 3x1 column matrix, and inertia is diagonalized, can you see how the elements of inertia 'pick out' their appropriate values in the w column matrix? Then you get something like:

[tex]L=I_{xx}\omega_x+I_{yy}\omega_y+I_{zz}\omega_z[/tex]
and the L and w vectors must be parallel. The simpler name for this is rotation about a principal axis. Regurgitating, when a rigid object is rotated about one of it's principal axes, the inertia tensor is diagonalized, and L and w are parallel.

And here's seemingly trivial part after all this analysis:
Euler's equations are derived under the assumption that a rigid object is being rotated about one of it's principal axes; therefore, it must have parallel angular momentum and angular velocity.

So now, angular velocity and angular momentum are parallel, and angular velocity has a constant magnitude, and I is constant. L is now a product of constants.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K