What Are Degrees of Freedom in Classical Mechanics?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of degrees of freedom in classical mechanics, particularly within the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian frameworks. Participants express confusion regarding the definitions and implications of degrees of freedom, especially in relation to position, velocity, and constraints in various systems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between degrees of freedom and the ability to change variables independently, questioning whether velocity and acceleration count as degrees of freedom. There is discussion about how constraints affect the total degrees of freedom in a system, with some participants attempting to clarify the distinctions between point particles and extended bodies.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with various interpretations being explored. Some participants have offered insights into how degrees of freedom are counted and the implications of constraints, but there is no explicit consensus on the definitions or applications of the concept.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention confusion stemming from different sources, including lectures and articles, and express uncertainty about how to apply the concept of degrees of freedom to specific systems, particularly when considering multiple bodies or constraints.

sponsoredwalk
Messages
531
Reaction score
5
What are degrees of Freedom in the Lagrangian/Hamiltonian formulation of classical mechanics?

I've been getting very confused trying to understand this concept.

Would six degrees of freedom mean up, down, left, right, back & forward?

I've seen it said that 3 degrees of freedom mean the x, y & z axes, so my above sentence is really only 3 degrees of freedom, is it?

Then, I seen the Susskind classical mechanics lecture claim there are 6 degrees of freedom, x, y & z axes & then position, velocity & acceleration.

But, then I read in a previous physicsforums post the claim that velocity & acceleration are not dimensions ergo they are not degrees of freedom!

The wikipedia article is not in the least helpful & I've tried to watch the nptelhrd lectures to only get more confused.

What does it mean to have a degree of freedom constricted also?

Thanks it would be really helpful for somebody to shed some light on this idea for me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The degrees of freedom are what variables can be changed independently of each other. If you have a set of equations that involve x,y,and z, those equations have 3 degrees of freedom, since x, y, and z can all change independently of the others. If the equations happen to involve vx, vy, and vz, there are now 6 degrees of freedom.
 
So the position of each "particle" in space, i.e. it's ability to move freely in any axis represents the 3 degrees of freedom.

Then, if this particle has a velocity this allows three more degrees of freedom?

I can't picture how the constraints work in a system like the one in the picture. Where is the constraint, why are there 5 degrees of freedom in this system? The body is still able to move in all axes...

edit: the weird "r'ed" arrows are position vectors, as are the "v's" velocity vectors...
 

Attachments

  • Why.jpg
    Why.jpg
    13 KB · Views: 480
Last edited:
A point particle in R^3 has only 3 degrees of freedom: its (x,y,z) position. The velocities are NOT additional DoF, because they are just time derivatives of position.

An extended body has 3 additional degrees of freedom because it can rotate around its center of mass, and angular momentum has 3 components.

In your system, I assume you have point particles, else you would have 6 degrees of freedom as just mentioned: position of center of mass, and rotation about center of mass. But since you have point particles, you have one less DoF (i.e., 5), because there can be no angular momentum around the line connecting the particles.

Another way to think of this is "How many numbers do I have to specify to completely describe the system at a given point in time?"
 
That's amazing! So I'll just clarify my thoughts, degrees of freedom are three degrees of freedom represented as positions in space or a "phase space" w/ respect to the bodies center of mass & if this body is extended it has the capability to rotate about it's center of mass so these rotations enable three further degrees of freedom. These rotations are captured in angular momentum.

Yeah I had "big" point particles :-p I suppose I would be better in thinking of this system as classical for now. So, if I am to think clasically this is a macroscopic body & there are 6 degrees of freedom of this system, the body can rotate about a fixed point.

I just have one more question, I heard in the lecture linked to above that each body considered separately has it's own no. of degrees of freedom.
So, in the picture if I consider the two bodies connected to the red bar as a single body I get 6 DoF.
If I look at one of the masses as a separate entity, there are 3 degrees of freedom, as the bar that the mass is connected to prevents any angular movements.

Correct? Even a lil?:redface:
 
Well you would count the position and velocity degrees of freedom as separate degrees of freedom. Just in your case the energy doesn't depend on the position degrees of freedom so you ignore them. You will only have the translational kinetic and the rotational kinetic degrees of freedom that Ben worked out to be 5.

If this diatomic molecule was trapped in a harmonic oscillator trap or the particles interacted through a spring-like force, then you would have to include the position degrees of freedom.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K