Solve 2-Body Equation for t w/ Given Parameters

  • Thread starter Thread starter Philosophaie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formulas
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving a 2-body equation in Cartesian coordinates while applying Newtonian physics principles. The equations provided describe the motion of two bodies under gravitational influence, with variables for position and velocity. A participant questions the correctness of the equations and seeks clarification on what system is being modeled. There is skepticism regarding the validity of the equations, suggesting they may not accurately represent the intended scenario. The need for a clearer context and purpose for the equations is emphasized to facilitate proper analysis.
Philosophaie
Messages
456
Reaction score
0
For a 2 Body Equation:

x = - \frac{1}{2} \frac{GM}{r^2}cos(\theta) cos(\phi) t^2 +v_x t + x_0
y= - \frac{1}{2} \frac{GM}{r^2} sin(\theta) cos(\phi) t^2 +v_y t + y_0
z= - \frac{1}{2} \frac{GM}{r^2} sin(\phi) t^2 +v_z t + z_0


r= sqrt(x^2 + y^2 + z^2)
\theta = atan(\frac{y}{x})
\phi = acos(\frac{z}{r})

Given:v_x, v_y, v_z, x_0, y_0, z_0 and M.

Now all I have to solve for t.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I see a bunch of formulas. What do they represent?
 
I am working in Cartesian Coordinates. I want to solve for x, y, z and t. I want to do this in Newtonian Physics.

For the fourth equation in the four equations and four unknowns I choose the geodesic:

(\frac{dx}{dt})^2 + (\frac{dy}{dt})^2 + (\frac{dz}{dt})^2 = 0

Are the geodesic, the x equation, the y equation, and the z equation (above) correct?
 
Last edited:
I am working in Cartesian Coordinates. I want to solve for x, y, z and t. I want to do this in Newtonian Physics.
You want to solve for x,y,z, and t, for what?

Are the geodesic, the x equation, the y equation, and the z equation (above) correct?
It is not possible to tell since you won't tell us what these equations are supposed to represent. What system are you attempting to model?

I suspect that the equations are not correct.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...

Similar threads

Replies
33
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
891
Back
Top