High School Significance of the solution of the Euler-Lagrange equation

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the significance of the Euler-Lagrange equation in Lagrangian mechanics, particularly in the context of a simple pendulum. The correct Lagrangian for a pendulum of mass m and length l is established as $$L = (1/2)(ml^2)\dot \theta^2 - mgl(1 - \cos\theta)$$. The resulting equation of motion, derived from the Euler-Lagrange equation, is $$ml^2 \ddot{\theta} + mgl\sin{\theta} = 0$$, which simplifies to simple harmonic motion under the small angle approximation. The conversation clarifies that the choice of potential energy reference point does not affect the equations of motion, as it only introduces an additive constant.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrangian mechanics
  • Familiarity with the Euler-Lagrange equation
  • Knowledge of simple harmonic motion (SHM)
  • Basic calculus, particularly derivatives and differential equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and applications of the Euler-Lagrange equation in various mechanical systems
  • Explore the concept of generalized coordinates in Lagrangian mechanics
  • Learn about the small angle approximation and its implications in pendulum motion
  • Investigate the relationship between potential energy reference points and equations of motion
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those studying mechanics, as well as educators teaching Lagrangian mechanics and its applications in real-world systems.

Hamiltonian
Messages
296
Reaction score
193
TL;DR
on applying the Euler Lagrange equation onto a system what exactly are you solving for and what is the significance of the solution you get?
I am new to Lagrangian mechanics and I have gone through basic examples of solving the Euler Lagrange equation for simple pendulums or projectiles and things like that. But I am unable to understand what we are exactly solving the equation for or what is the significance of the differential equation you end up with.

for example, if you consider a simple pendulum of mass m and length l
you get the lagrangian as $$L = (1/2)(mgl)\dot \theta^2 - mgl + mglcos\theta$$
and finally solving the Euler Lagrange equation gives you $$ 0 = \ddot \theta + (g\theta)/l$$
what is the significance of this solution?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You obtain the equations of motion, but I don't think your Lagrangian for this example is correct (even though you somehow got the right answer :wink:)? Shouldn't it be, up to an additive constant,$$\mathcal{L} = T - V = \frac{1}{2}ml^2 \dot{\theta}^2 + mgl\cos{\theta}$$Then for the single generalised coordinate ##\theta##,$$\frac{d}{dt} \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{\theta}} = \frac{d}{dt} ml^2 \dot{\theta} = ml^2 \ddot{\theta}$$ $$\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \theta} = -mgl \sin{\theta}$$So the equation of motion is$$ml^2 \ddot{\theta} + mgl\sin{\theta} = 0$$If you take the small angle approximation,$$\ddot{\theta} = -\frac{g}{l} \theta$$That's SHM with ##\omega = \sqrt{\frac{g}{l}}## which is exactly what you'd get with forces.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes Dale, PeroK and vanhees71
etotheipi said:
You obtain the equations of motion, but I don't think your Lagrangian for this example is correct (even though you somehow got the right answer :wink:)?
my bad shouldn't it be $$L = (1/2)(ml^2)\dot \theta^2 - mgl(1 - cos\theta)$$
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Sure, but it's equivalent to @etotheipi 's, because it just differs by a constant.
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
It doesn't matter whether you take the zero of potential energy to be at the bottom of the swing or at the hinge, because that amounts to an additive constant, which doesn't change the equations of motion.

Your kinetic energy is now correct; notice that in polar coordinates the velocity is ##\vec{v} = r\dot{\theta} \hat{\theta} + \dot{r}\hat{r}##, and since the motion is constrained to be circular, ##\dot{r} = 0## and ##r = l##, so ##\vec{v} \cdot \vec{v} = l^2 \dot{\theta}^2##
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes Dale, Hamiltonian and vanhees71
In sci-fi when an author is talking about space travellers or describing the movement of galaxies they will say something like “movement in space only means anything in relation to another object”. Examples of this would be, a space ship moving away from earth at 100 km/s, or 2 galaxies moving towards each other at one light year per century. I think it would make it easier to describe movement in space if we had three axis that we all agree on and we used 0 km/s relative to the speed of...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K