Understanding the Dissipative Lagrangian for Coupled Oscillators

  • Thread starter Thread starter muzialis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lagrangian
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a specific Lagrangian for coupled oscillators, which presents challenges in understanding its implications for energy conservation and the behavior of the oscillators. The Lagrangian is noted to yield equations of motion that suggest one oscillator experiences negative friction while the other does not, leading to one being exponentially stable and the other unstable. Participants express confusion regarding how energy dissipated by one oscillator can equal the energy input to the other, given their opposing behaviors. The conversation highlights that the Lagrangian describes the system as a whole rather than allowing for separate energy definitions for each oscillator. Ultimately, the participants seek clarity on the physical interpretation and applications of this Lagrangian framework.
muzialis
Messages
156
Reaction score
1
Hello,

I run across the following Lagrangian, $$\mathcal{L} = m \dot{x}\dot{y} + \frac{1}{2} \gamma (x \dot{y} - \dot{x} y) $$

I can see how a variation with respect to $$ x, y $$ yields the (viscous) equations of motions

$$ \ddot{x} + \dot{x} = 0 \quad, \quad \ddot{y} - \dot{y} = 0 $$.

In the paper I attach this Lagrangian is described as being the physical Lagrangian for two coupled oscillators, one with negative and the other with positive friction (hence one is exponentially stable, while the other is not, as the equation of motion stress).

I do not understand how the lagrangian $$ \mathcal{L}$$ can correspond to two such oscillators.
Moreover, the whole idea of the formalism seems to conserve energy, in the sense that the (non-dampening) oscillator will absorb all the energy dissipated by the viscous oscillator.
But then the two speeds should be in magnitude equal, and not like $$ e^{t}$$ and $$e^{-t}$$.

I struggle to understand the physical picture, I wounder if anybody could help.

Thanks you very much
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
I do not understand how the lagrangian
L
can correspond to two such oscillators.
You wrote two equations above, one is the equation of h.o. with friction, the other one has friction term with opposite sign, which leads to run-away.

The energy here is defined as
<br /> E = p_x \dot x + p_y \dot y - L = m \dot x\dot y.<br />
and since the Lagrangian does not depend on time, it should be constant in time.

You can verify this by multiplying the solutions for \dot x, \dot y - the exponentials will cancel out and the result does not depend on time.

However, all this seems very artificial - I would like to see some useful application of it.
 
Jano,

many thanks for your response.
I am still confused though.
1) Should not the Lagrangian for two harmonic oscillators (with equal mass m) be something like (I have the lingering feeling I am not seeing something obvious)
$$ \frac{1}{2}m (e^{-2t}+e^{2t}) $$
2) As you underline, oner h.o. will dampen exponentially, the other one will run away.
How is it possible then the energy dissipated in one equals the energy input in the other, as the article states?

Thank you ever so much
 
No problem muzialis.

1) Should not the Lagrangian for two harmonic oscillators (with equal mass m) be something like (I have the lingering feeling I am not seeing something obvious)
<br /> 1/2m(e^{−2t}+e^{2t})<br />

No, the Lagrangian is usually not a function of time, but a function of coordinates and velocities (their derivatives). The first formula for L you wrote is mathematically valid Lagrangian, but the function in the quote is not, because there are no coordinates/velocities.

2) As you underline, oner h.o. will dampen exponentially, the other one will run away.
How is it possible then the energy dissipated in one equals the energy input in the other, as the article states?

This seems like very imprecise way to say much simpler thing, that the total energy m\dot x\dot y is conserved. I do not see any simple way to define separate energy of the first and second oscillator; the Lagrangian describes the system as whole and the energy derived from it corresponds to the whole system as well.

If the energy came out as a sum of independent terms, then we could ascribe the terms to subsystems, but in this case, there is just one term, so it makes no sense to speak about the energy of one oscillator.
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Hello! I am generating electrons from a 3D gaussian source. The electrons all have the same energy, but the direction is isotropic. The electron source is in between 2 plates that act as a capacitor, and one of them acts as a time of flight (tof) detector. I know the voltage on the plates very well, and I want to extract the center of the gaussian distribution (in one direction only), by measuring the tof of many electrons. So the uncertainty on the position is given by the tof uncertainty...
Back
Top