Understanding the Orbit of Kapler's Law and its Relation to Potential Energy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cosmossos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Orbits
Cosmossos
Messages
100
Reaction score
0
Hello,
In question 3(b) in the following file
http://phstudy.technion.ac.il/~wn114101/hw/wn2010_hw09.pdf

Why the orbit will be a straight line?
I think that when the particles are coming to r=0 the potential will be infinity, isn't that so?
So the energy will be infinity and e will be infinity... please help me...
thank you

AND ONE MORE THING: if the potential is a/r^2 (>0) then then the two objects will attract each other, right? But in the Gravitational law (-Gm1m2/r^2) the potential is <0 and the objects will attract to each other
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Cosmossos said:
Hello,
In question 3(b) in the following file
http://phstudy.technion.ac.il/~wn114101/hw/wn2010_hw09.pdf

Why the orbit will be a straight line?
The problem statement explicitly states the particles move "on the x direction" and "on the y direction". Presumably they mean on the x and y axes; it is not worded quite properly but I can't imagine it meaning anything else.

So, each particle moves in straight line simply because the problem statement says that they do. What would actually cause this to happen is not important.

I think that when the particles are coming to r=0 the potential will be infinity, isn't that so?
No, it would be negative infinity in this example.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top