Rewrite Lagrangian's equation of motion as a 1st order difeq

noon0788
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
I'm most of the way through this problem. I've already found the lagrangian equations of motion as a second order differential equation. I'm just stuck at the end...

Homework Statement



Derive a first order differential equation for the motion of a hoop in a bigger hoop.

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution



I found the equation of motion to be:

0=g Sin(θ) + 3/2*R*Doubledot[θ]

I think a conserved quantity is angular momentum = 3/2*m*k2*Dot[θ]

How do I write θ as a first order difeq?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You don't state all your variables clearly and it is difficult for me to figure out what system you are solving for.

If you are correct and\frac{3}{2} m k^2 \dot{\theta} is indeed a COM (I don't know what k is since you did not state in your original question and I am going to assume that it does not vary with time), then: \ddot{\theta} = 0, which would reduce the EOM to just 0 = g \sin\theta.
 
Sorry, here's some clarification:

Basically, it's a hoop that's allowed to move in a larger fixed hoop without slipping.

k is the radius between the center of the free hoop and the bigger hoop that it's in. It does not vary with time.

If the EOM is 0=gsinθ, isn't that just trivial?
 
noon0788 said:
Sorry, here's some clarification:

Basically, it's a hoop that's allowed to move in a larger fixed hoop without slipping.

k is the radius between the center of the free hoop and the bigger hoop that it's in. It does not vary with time.
There is no such thing as the radius between two things? You mean the distance between the center of the two loops? And I suppose your \theta is the angle of the line that connects the two centers makes with the vertical? How did you eliminate the angular variable for the small loop? How did you apply the equation of constrain (which I think is what this problem is all about)? Why don't you start from the beginning and show us what you have done.

If the EOM is 0=gsinθ, isn't that just trivial?
That is why I think you are wrong.
 
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