I Trouble understanding coordinates for the Lagrangian

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding the derivation of infinitesimal displacement for particles in spherical coordinates as presented in Landau's mechanics book. The solution involves applying Pythagorean principles to orthogonal infinitesimal displacements, specifically in terms of the angles θ and φ. It clarifies that when φ is constant, the displacement is represented by Eθ, and when θ is constant, it is represented by Eφ, leading to the expression for total displacement squared. The conversation highlights the breakdown of motion into horizontal and vertical components, reinforcing the orthogonality of the displacements. Overall, the explanation aids in grasping the application of spherical coordinates in Lagrangian mechanics.
p1ndol
Messages
7
Reaction score
3
Hello, I'm having some trouble understanding this solution provided in Landau's book on mechanics. I'd like to understand how they arrived at the infinitesimal displacement for the particles m1. I appreciate any kind of help regarding this problem, thank you!
 

Attachments

  • Captura de Tela (65).png
    Captura de Tela (65).png
    16.8 KB · Views: 136
Physics news on Phys.org
It's nothing more than Pythagoras applied to orthogonal infinitesimal displacements ##ad\theta## and ##a\sin{\theta} d\phi##, however if you want a (very slightly) more formal approach in terms of the holonomic basis...

if ##\phi## is held constant then ##\mathbf{E}_{\theta} = \dfrac{\partial \mathbf{r}}{\partial \theta} = a \hat{\boldsymbol{e}}_{\theta}## whilst if ##\theta## is held constant then ##\mathbf{E}_{\phi} = \dfrac{\partial \mathbf{r}}{\partial \phi} = a\sin{\theta} \hat{\boldsymbol{e}}_{\phi}##. Since ##\mathbf{E}_{\theta}## and ##\mathbf{E}_{\phi}## are orthogonal you have $$dl^2 = \displaystyle{\sum_i \sum_j }dx^i \mathbf{E}_i \cdot dx^j \mathbf{E}_j= {E_{\theta}}^2 d\theta^2 + {E_{\phi}}^2 d\phi^2 = a^2 d\theta^2 + a^2 \sin^2{\theta} d\phi^2$$
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, Leo Liu and p1ndol
Thank you very much!
 
  • Like
Likes ergospherical
I think he did it in spherical coordinates. The infinitesimal motion of m1 can be disassembled into two parts; this disassembly is correct since the displacements in the two directions are small (meaning they are kinda linear) and orthogonal:

Displacement^2 caused by horizontal rotation ##\Omega##:
$$dl^2_{horizontal}=R^2(\Omega\mathrm{dt})^2=a^2\sin^2 \theta(\Omega\mathrm{dt})^2$$

Displacement^2 caused by the rotation of m1 about A in the plane of book:
$$v=r\omega\implies dl^2_{vertical}=(a\mathrm d{\theta})^2$$

Hope this helps.
 
Thanks, you couldn't have been clearer!
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top