I Tong Dynamics: cannot cancel angle from orbit energy expression calculation

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter jds17
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Orbit
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a challenge in deriving the energy expression from David Tong's lectures, specifically the formula E = (mk² / 2l²)(e² - 1). The user struggles to understand how the angle θ cancels out in the energy calculation, despite recognizing that energy is a constant of motion. They initially mismanaged the variables by not expressing the radius r in terms of r₀, θ, and eccentricity. After realizing this oversight, the user plans to revisit the calculation the following day. The conversation highlights the importance of correctly substituting variables in physics calculations.
jds17
Messages
7
Reaction score
1
Hi, I love the lectures by David Tong. Usually I can follow his calculations (but I am not yet so far into the lectures...). But one that I just cannot do is the derivation of the energy in (4.16), the expression being ##E = \frac {mk^2} {2 l^2} (e^2 - 1)##, where l is the constant angular momentum of the orbit of the single point particle, m its mass, V(r) = - k/r the expression for the potential and e the eccentricity of the orbit.
I just don't see how using the expression ##\frac {dr} {d\theta} = \frac {r_0 e \sin(\theta)} {(1+e \cos(\theta))^2}## (page 59) in the expression of the energy using the effective potential cancels out the angle ##\theta##. Of course it has to work since the energy is a constant of motion, but no matter what trigonometric manipulations I use, it does not cancel out the angle.
In case it is not so readable I have attached the relevant sections from the lecture
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20240910_232116.jpg
    IMG_20240910_232116.jpg
    32.3 KB · Views: 48
  • IMG_20240910_232129.jpg
    IMG_20240910_232129.jpg
    17 KB · Views: 41
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you cancelling units or dimensions?
An angle is a ratio, it has no dimension.
 
Thanks! I know, the angle is dimensionless, but still the energy cannot depend on the angle.

I just found why I could not continue with the calculation: I left the radius r in the expression for the energy, but I need to expand it in terms of r_0, theta and the eccentricity as well! It is getting late here. I will do the calculation tomorrow.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
Back
Top