Validating the kinetic energy for the two particle collision problem

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around validating the kinetic energy expression for a two-particle collision problem in classical mechanics. The context involves two particles moving under mutual forces, with the equations of motion and conservation of energy being central to the analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the differentiation of the conservation of energy equation and question how to relate the kinetic energy to the forces acting on the particles. There is discussion on the dependencies of kinetic and potential energy on the velocities and positions of the particles.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered guidance on differentiating the energy equation with respect to time and using the equations of motion to eliminate forces. There is recognition of the complexity involved in the relationships between the variables and the need for careful consideration of how energy is expressed in terms of the particles' velocities and positions.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the challenge of integrating the equations and the confusion arising from the multiple variables involved, including the need to account for the kinetic and potential energy associated with each particle. There is an acknowledgment of the original poster's uncertainty regarding the differentiation process and the relationships between the variables.

Andreasdreas
Messages
8
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The following is a summaration of a piece of text in my textbook:

The setting is two particles moving in one dimension, under mutual forces, so that the equations of motion are

(1): m_1 a_1=F and m_2 a_2=-F (a stands for acceleration)

F is only a function of the relative distance between the particles x=x_1-x_2 : F=F(x) so F is conservative and a potential energy function V(x) can be introduced.

The law of conservation of energy then takes the form

(2): T + V=E=constant

with

(3):T=\frac{1}{2}m_1(v_1)^2+\frac{1}{2}m_2(v_2)^2 (T is the kinetic energy and v stands for velocity, this is also the relative velocity of the two particles: v=v_1-v_2).

The books then says that:

eq. 3 can easily be verified by differentiating eq. 2 and using eq. 1 and the realtion between V and F.

Homework Equations


The relation between V and F: F(x)=-\frac{dV}{dx}


The Attempt at a Solution


I am quit unsure with what i should differentiate with respect to when differentiating eq. (2)
V is a function of x and T is a function of v. What i have tried is this:

T+V=constant \implies \frac{dT}{dv} \frac{dv}{dt}=-\frac{dV}{dx}=F(x)

Then i am unsure what term i should use for F(x).
What i have done is to put it equal to ma where a is the acceleration of the relative position x=x_1-x_2 and i guess m should be m_1+m_2 .
But integrating ma dosent seem to yield eq. 3, I have integatred like this:
\int \int (ma) dt dv = \int (mv) dv =\frac{1}{2}mv^2=\frac{1}{2}(m_1+m_2)(v_1-v_2)^2
\frac{1}{2}(m_1+m_2)(v_1-v_2)^2 must give a lot of terms which i don't see will cancel out to give eq. 3
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When we say tha energy is conserved, we mean that is constant as time passes. So the derivative of energy w.r.t. time will be zero. Althought V depends explicitly on x = x1-x2, since x1 and x2 are functions of time, then V is actually a function of time. So try to differntiate T+V=E w.r.t. time and then use the equations of motions to get rid of the forces. Also, the force applied to "i" particle will be equall to minus the partial derivative of V w.r.t. xi.
 
To elaborate a little on cosmic dust's good suggestion:

Note that ##T## is a function of ##v_1## and ##v_2##: ##T(v_1, v_2)## and ##V## is a function of ##x_1## and ##x_2##: ##V(x_1, x_2)##. So, overall, the total energy is a function of four variables: ##E(v_1, v_2, x_1, x_2)##.

The time derivative is ##\dot E = \frac{\partial E}{\partial v_1} \dot v_1 + \frac{\partial E}{\partial v_2} \dot v_2 + \frac{\partial E}{\partial x_1} \dot x_1 + \frac{\partial E}{\partial x_2} \dot x_2##

In carrying this out, you’ll need to use ##\frac{\partial V}{\partial x_1} = \frac{\partial V}{\partial x} \frac{\partial x}{\partial x_1}## and similarly for ##x_2##.
 
I guess it can be done that way, althought I had something else in mind:

\frac{dE}{dt}=0\Rightarrow \frac{dT}{dt}+\frac{dV}{dt}=0\Rightarrow \frac{dT}{dt}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial {{x}_{1}}}{{v}_{1}}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial {{x}_{2}}}{{v}_{2}}=0\Rightarrow

\Rightarrow \frac{dT}{dt}-{{m}_{1}}{{\dot{v}}_{1}}{{v}_{1}}-{{m}_{2}}{{\dot{v}}_{2}}{{v}_{2}}=0\Rightarrow \frac{dT}{dt}=\frac{d}{dt}\left( \frac{1}{2}{{m}_{1}}v_{1}^{2}+\frac{1}{2}{{m}_{2}}v_{2}^{2} \right)
 
cosmic dust said:
I guess it can be done that way, althought I had something else in mind:

\frac{dE}{dt}=0\Rightarrow \frac{dT}{dt}+\frac{dV}{dt}=0\Rightarrow \frac{dT}{dt}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial {{x}_{1}}}{{v}_{1}}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial {{x}_{2}}}{{v}_{2}}=0\Rightarrow

\Rightarrow \frac{dT}{dt}-{{m}_{1}}{{\dot{v}}_{1}}{{v}_{1}}-{{m}_{2}}{{\dot{v}}_{2}}{{v}_{2}}=0\Rightarrow \frac{dT}{dt}=\frac{d}{dt}\left( \frac{1}{2}{{m}_{1}}v_{1}^{2}+\frac{1}{2}{{m}_{2}}v_{2}^{2} \right)

Yes, that's much better. I lost sight of the question! You want to verify that T has the form given in OP's equation (3). Very good.
(I was assuming (3) and verifying E is constant. Not what was asked.:redface:)
 
Thanks for the responds, i see it clearly now.
I got confused in the different variables and also i was not proberly aware that a kinetic and potential energy is attached to each of the particles.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K