Verifying Lagrange Equations for Orbit around Massive Body

  • Thread starter Thread starter snoopies622
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Orbit
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on verifying Lagrange equations for a particle in orbit around a massive body, specifically focusing on two equations derived from classical mechanics. The first equation reflects conservation of angular momentum, while the second represents the net radial force acting on the particle. The participant expresses confidence in the correctness of these equations and discusses methods for solving them, including expressing r in terms of theta and utilizing Hamiltonian reformulation. They highlight that the system is analytically solvable and provide a transformation leading to a conic section solution for r. The conversation also touches on techniques for typing equations in the forum.
snoopies622
Messages
852
Reaction score
29
I am trying out the Lagrange equations for the first time, in this case for a particle in orbit around a massive body using classical mechanics. I come up with

<br /> 2 \dot r \dot \theta + r \ddot \theta = 0

<br /> \ddot r - r \dot \theta ^2 + \frac {GM}{r^2}=0<br /> <br />

These seem credible to me but are unfamiliar. Are they correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
OK, I just gave them a second look and now think they are correct. The first one represents conservation of angular momentum (just take the first derivative of mr^2 \dot \theta with respect to time, set it equal to zero then divide both sides by mr), and multiplying the second one by m represents the net radial force on the particle as the difference between the centrifugal force acting on it and the gravitational force.

Just in case anyone was interested...
 
Last edited:
By the way, how does one go about solving equations like these? I (vaguely) remember learning how to solve 2nd-order differential equations back in college but those were of only one variable. Do I just treat the other one as if it's a constant?
 
unfortunately, to solve these you have to express r in terms of theta, probably integrate at least once, and do another substitution. Sometimes reformulating the problem in terms of the hamiltonian helps. It definitely is an analytically solvable system though. Off the top of my head the first equation looks right, second one is at least close. If i have time i'll do this tomorrow but I need to find someone to help me with some questions on fluid mechanics first!

also, i should be more clear. there are many more powerful ways to solve 2nd order PDE's, but i think the method I described will work.
 
sorry,i don't know how to type an equation here,generally AlexGreen was right,in details,as you said,r^2*(dA/dt)=Constant(A is theta),you get dA/dt=C/r^2,you can substitute this to the second equation first,but the essential step is to express dotdot r as:r''=dr'/dA*dA/dt=C/r^2*dr'/dA,similarly, r'=dr/dA*dA/dt=dr/dA*C/r^2=-C*d(1/r)/dA,so r''=-C^2/r^2*(d^2)(1/r)/dA^2,and let u=1/r,put everything in the second equation,you get something like u''+ku=H (k,H are constants,and u'' is the second order derivative with respect to A),then you can solve it by standard method.
 
Thanks, kof9595995. I get

<br /> <br /> \frac {d^2 u}{d \theta ^2} + u = \frac {GM}{C^2}

where

<br /> <br /> C=r^2 \dot \theta.

which yields - I think -

<br /> <br /> r = \frac {1}{k sin \theta + \frac {GM}{C^2}}<br /> <br />

- a conic section, as one would expect. Now, to get \theta in terms of t..

If you want to know how to type an equation, just left-click on it and the details will appear! :smile:
 
Last edited:
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...
Back
Top