MHB Solving for Central Force in $r = c\theta^2$ Orbit

Carla1985
Messages
91
Reaction score
0
Could someone please explain how I work with $-mf(r)e_r$ in this question. Usually we get given an equation (like the one for f(r)) and have to work out the orbit by getting a differential equation etc. I'm not too sure how to work it this way around.

"A particle of mass m moves under the influence of a central force $\textbf{F}(\textbf{r}) =−mf(r)e_r$, in the orbit

$r = c\theta^2$, (1)


where c > 0 and (r, θ) and er , eθ are the polar co-ordinates and corresponding basis vectors in the plane of motion of the particle. Show that:
\[
f(r)=-h^2(\frac{6c}{r^4}+\frac{1}{r^3})
\]
where $r^2\dot{\theta}=h$ is constant



[Hint: Use the substitution $u(\theta)=\frac{1}{r(\theta}$ to write the radial equation $\ddot{r}-r\dot{\theta}^2=-f(r)$ in terms of u(θ), and then determine f using this equation and (1).]"
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Carla1985 said:
Could someone please explain how I work with $-mf(r)e_r$ in this question. Usually we get given an equation (like the one for f(r)) and have to work out the orbit by getting a differential equation etc. I'm not too sure how to work it this way around.

"A particle of mass m moves under the influence of a central force $\textbf{F}(\textbf{r}) =−mf(r)e_r$, in the orbit

$r = c\theta^2$, (1)

where c > 0 and (r, θ) and er , eθ are the polar co-ordinates and corresponding basis vectors in the plane of motion of the particle. Show that:
\[
f(r)=-h^2(\frac{6c}{r^4}+\frac{1}{r^3})
\]
where $r^2\dot{\theta}=h$ is constant


[Hint: Use the substitution $u(\theta)=\frac{1}{r(\theta}$ to write the radial equation $\ddot{r}-r\dot{\theta}^2=-f(r)$ in terms of u(θ), and then determine f using this equation and (1).]"

Hi Carla!

Your equations are:

$$\ddot r - r \dot \theta^2=-f(r) \qquad$$ central acceleration
$$r^2\dot \theta = h \qquad\qquad\qquad$$ preservation of angular momentum in a conservative central field
$$r=c\theta^2 \qquad\qquad\qquad$$ the given orbit

Can you solve $f(r)$ from these, expressing it using only $r$?
 
I'm not sure how to do the $\ddot{r}$ part. I rearranged $r=c\dot{\theta}^2$ for theta and subbed that into get
$f(r)=-(\ddot{r}-\frac{h^2}{r^3})$

I differentiated r and got $\dot{r}=2c\theta\dot{\theta}$
and then subbed in theta again: $\frac{2ch\theta}{r^2}$ and then did the same thing again to get $\ddot{r}=\frac{2ch}{r^2}\theta\dot{\theta}=\frac{2ch^2}{r^2}\theta$ which doesn't add up at all.

I think the hint is confusing me too, it says to do a substitution u=1/r which we always do our other questions but I'm not sure where that applies here.
 
The substitution simply makes some of the problem easier to work. But it is not necessary. See if you can finish it the way I like Serena is helping you with. It will help if you if you then want to go back and use the hint.

-Dan
 
Thanks, I am still working on it thought I think I am going to take a break and get some sleep. its past midnight and the kids will have me up at 7am lol. I am so close its frustrating though.
I have $\ddot{r}=\frac{2ch^2\theta}{r^4}$ instead of $\frac{6ch^2}{r^4}$ and I cannot for the life of me see how I get rid of theta and get a 3 instead.

Maybe a fresh look in the morning will tell me where I've gone wrong though hehe.
 
Carla1985 said:
Maybe a fresh look in the morning will tell me where I've gone wrong though hehe.

Well... the morning has passed.
Any new insights? ;)
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top