Radial Equation for Two-Body Central Forces

Proofrific
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
I'm getting two different radial equations depending on when I plug in the angular momentum piece. Here's the Lagrangian:

L = \frac{1}{2} \mu (\dot{r}^2 + r^2 \dot{\phi}^2) - U(r)

The Euler-Lagrange equation for phi gives angular momentum (conserved), which can be solved for \dot{\phi}:

\dot{\phi} = \frac{l}{\mu r^2}

Now, let's find the radial equation (that is, the Euler-Lagrange equation for r):

Method 1: Substitute angular momentum piece into Lagrangian, then find the Euler-Lagrange equation for r.

L = \frac{1}{2} \mu \dot{r}^2 + \frac{l^2}{2 \mu r^2} - U(r)

\mu \ddot{r} = \frac{-l^2}{\mu r^3} - \frac{dU}{dr}

Method 2: Find the Euler-Lagrange equation for r, then substitute angular momentum piece into the radial equation.

\mu \ddot{r} = \mu r \dot{\phi}^2 - \frac{dU}{dr}

\mu \ddot{r} = \frac{l^2}{\mu r^3} - \frac{dU}{dr}

These two radial equations have opposite signs for the "centrifugal term." Which is correct, and why is the other wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Remember that when you solved for \dot{\phi}, you held r constant. Similarly, \phi should be held constant when you solve for the radial equation.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top