Rewriting Central Force Problem of Black Hole Potential

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around deriving a second-order differential equation for the function u(φ) related to the motion of an object orbiting a non-rotating black hole, starting from the radial equation in General Relativity. Participants explore the necessary substitutions and transformations, particularly focusing on expressing the radial velocity in terms of angular momentum and the new variable u = 1/r. The challenge lies in correctly transitioning from the first-order radial equation to the desired second-order form for u(φ). Ultimately, the correct approach leads to the equation u'' + u - (V_o/l^2) - 3V_ou^2 = 0, demonstrating the relationship between the variables. This transformation is crucial for understanding the dynamics of orbits in the context of black hole physics.
Digital Honeycomb
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


From the homework:
In General Relativity it is found that the radial equation of an object orbiting a non-rotating black hole has the form $$\dot r^2 + (1 - 2 \frac {V_o} {r} ) (\frac {l^2} {r^2} + 1) = E^2$$ where ##r## is the radial coordinate, ##l## is the angular momentum, and ##E## is the total energy; the potential ##V_o = GM_o##, where ##M_o## is the mass of the black hole. Show, using the standard substitution ##u = \frac {1} {r}##, and rewriting ##\dot r## in terms of ##\dot \phi## and ##u' = \frac {du} {d\phi}##, that we can write a differential equation for ##u(\phi)## of form $$u'' + u - \frac {V_o} {l^2} - 3V_ou^2 = E^2$$​

Homework Equations


All shown above.

The Attempt at a Solution


First off I'm not entirely sure how to rewrite ##\dot r## in terms of ##\dot \phi##. In the notes it is described that the angular momentum ##l = mr^2\dot\phi##, so therefore this equation could be written in the form $$\dot r = \sqrt{E^2 - (1 - 2V_o u)(m\dot\phi +1)}$$ but it is not exactly like I can plug this back into the original equation. I can also try taking that since ##u = \frac {1} {r}##, that ##\frac {du} {dt} = \frac {-1} {r^2} \frac {dr} {dt} = \frac {du} {d\phi} \frac {d\phi} {dt}## and so ##\dot r = \frac {-1} {u^2} u' \dot \phi## but putting this into the first equation, I'm not exactly sure where the ##u''## is supposed to come from. Am I coming at this from the wrong direction entirely? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure about the motivation for going from the equation in terms of \dot{r} to the second-order equation in terms of u, but here's how it could be done:

First take a time derivative of your equation for \dot{r}. The right side of the equation is a constant, so that gives:

2 \dot{r} \ddot{r} - F(r) \dot{r} = 0

where - F(r) is the derivative of that potential-like expression on the left side. Dividing through by \dot{r} and rearranging gives you a second-order equation for r:

\ddot{r} = \frac{1}{2} F(r)

Now, at this point, you can use a trick from nonrelativistic orbital dynamics. You do a simultaneous change of dependent variable from r to u = \frac{1}{r} and a change of independent variable from t to \phi.
 
  • Like
Likes Digital Honeycomb
Hmm, okay... so doing that I end up with the equation, $$\ddot r = \frac {l^2} {r ^3} - 3 \frac {V_o l^2} {r^4} - 2 \frac {V_0} {r^2},$$ substituting ##u = \frac {1} {r}## is simple enough for the RHS of the equation, but not for understanding exactly how to change ##\ddot r## into an equation of ##u(t)##. I know that ##\frac {d^2u} {dr^2} = \frac {2} {r^3}##, but I'm afraid I don't understand how to turn this into an equation in respect to time. I suppose I can take that ##\dot u = \frac {-1} {r^2} \dot r## and then ##\ddot u = \frac {2} {r^3} \dot r - \frac {1}{r^2}\ddot r##, but beyond that I'm not sure how to turn this purely into some ##u(t)## (beyond that, I realize I can take ##d\phi = \frac {L}{m}u^2 dt##, however).
 
As I said, you have to simultaneously change r to u and t to \phi.

\frac{dr}{dt} = \frac{dr}{du} \frac{du}{d\phi} \frac{d\phi}{dt}

\frac{dr}{du} = -\frac{1}{u^2}
\frac{d\phi}{dt} = \frac{\mathcal{l}}{mr^2} = \frac{\mathcal{l}}{m} u^2

So \frac{dr}{dt} = -\frac{\mathcal{l}}{m} \frac{du}{d\phi}

Then operate again by \frac{d}{dt} = \frac{d\phi}{dt} \frac{d}{d\phi} to get:

So \frac{d^2 r}{dt^2} = -(\frac{\mathcal{l}}{m})^2 u^2 \frac{d^2 u}{d\phi^2}
 
  • Like
Likes Digital Honeycomb
Oh! That makes sense! And then plugging that into the equation gives $$- \frac {l^2} {m^2}u^2 u'' = l^2 u^3 - 3V_o l^2 u^4 - V_o u^2$$ and that turns into $$u'' + u - \frac {V_o} {l^2} - 3V_o u^2 = 0$$ if you take ##m = 1##! Thank you so much!
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top