Sign of potential term in Lagrangian mechanics

  • #1
Admiralibr123
14
5
I have heard many times that it does not matter where you put the zero to calculate the potential energy and then ##L=T-V##. But mostly what we are doing is taking potential energy negative like in an atom for electron or a mass in gravitational field and then effectively adding it to kinetic energy. What if I take zero at the centre of atom and on the surface of earth, write ##V## positive and subtract if in lagrangian. I try that and EOM is different something like $$F=ma=-mg$$ for a free fall object. If I change it for a charge an electron in atom something similar happens.

Please someone explain, does $$F=-mg \quad \textrm{vs} \quad F=+mg$$ not matter? This is just a single term but if the EOM have multiple terms, this sign would surely make a difference. And in essence to me, it feels like it voids the negative sign in ##L=T-V##, if we can choose any sign for V. That must definitely not be the case, so where am I wrong in my reasoning?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Vanadium 50
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
29,950
15,641
Calculate the equations of motion for T - V and T - V + a constant. Any difference?
 
  • #3
33,871
11,576
You seem to have the mistaken idea that the arbitrariness of the zero means you can flip the sign of the potential. That is a mistake.

You can add a constant to the potential, you cannot multiply it by a constant. That includes multiplying it by -1
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, Delta2, etotheipi and 1 other person
  • #4
PeroK
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
2022 Award
24,046
15,752
That must definitely not be the case, so where am I wrong in my reasoning?
For GPE you have two conventions. If the object remains close to the surface, then you can write: $$V = mgh$$ where ##h## is the height above the surface.

And, in the general case we write $$V = -\frac{GMm}{r}$$.
The critical point, however, is that in both cases ##V## increases as ##r## or ##h## increases.

As a useful exercise, you could show that for ##r = R + h##, where ##h << R## we have:
$$V = -\frac{GMm}{r} = -\frac{GMm}{R + h} \approx V_0 + mgh$$ where ##V_0## is constant. This shows that the two conventions are approximately equivalent up to a constant term (in the case where the object remains close to the surface).
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, Dale and etotheipi

Suggested for: Sign of potential term in Lagrangian mechanics

  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
695
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
266
  • Last Post
Replies
12
Views
750
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
588
Replies
4
Views
398
Replies
4
Views
435
Replies
7
Views
400
Top