When KE is a function of position

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Trying2Learn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Position
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the formulation of kinetic energy (KE) in the context of the Lagrangian mechanics, specifically the relationship between KE and generalized coordinates. The kinetic energy is expressed as a function of both position (q) and its first time derivative (q-dot), particularly in the case of a particle in plane polar coordinates. The kinetic energy is represented as T(q, q-dot) = 0.5 * a_{ij}(q) * dot{q}^i * dot{q}^j, where the coefficients a_{ij}(q) depend on the coordinates. This formulation allows for a more general representation of kinetic energy, accommodating various coordinate systems.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrangian mechanics
  • Familiarity with generalized coordinates
  • Knowledge of kinetic and potential energy concepts
  • Basic proficiency in calculus and differential equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Lagrangian from classical mechanics principles
  • Explore the use of generalized coordinates in complex mechanical systems
  • Learn about the application of the Euler-Lagrange equation in dynamics
  • Investigate the role of quadratic forms in kinetic energy expressions
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those studying classical mechanics, as well as engineers and researchers working with dynamic systems and Lagrangian formulations.

Trying2Learn
Messages
375
Reaction score
57
TL;DR
Question about the Lagrangian
Hi all

In the Lagrangian, we have L = KE - PE

In most cases, I have seen KE as a function of q and q-dot (using the generic symbols).

However I first learned how KE = 0.5 m * v-squared.

Later, I used generalized coordinates and THAT is when KE became a function of q.

I get all that. However, I am still wondering WHY I have the feeling that, in most cases, KE is only a function of the parameter's first time derivative and ONLY involves the parameter in certain cases.

Maybe what I am asking is: "why did they first formulate L(q, q-dot) = KE(q, q-dot) and PE(q)

(I get the P only a function of q, by the way. That is not an issue for me.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's perhaps easiest to see through an example; consider a particle moving in ##\mathbf{R}^2##, and let the generalised co-ordinates be plane polar co-ordinates ##q = (r,\theta)##. The kinetic energy is\begin{align*}
T(q, \dot{q}) = \dfrac{1}{2} \dot{r}^2 + \dfrac{1}{2} r^2 \dot{\theta}^2
\end{align*}Not only does ##T## depend on ##\dot{r}## and ##\dot{\theta}##, but it also depends on ##r##. In the general case, the kinetic energy is a quadratic form whose coefficients ##a_{ij}(q)## depend on the co-ordinates,\begin{align*}
T(q,\dot{q}) = \dfrac{1}{2} a_{ij}(q) \dot{q}^i \dot{q}^j
\end{align*}where summation over repeated indices is implicit. For the previous example, ##a_{rr}(q) = 1## and ##a_{\theta \theta}(q) = r^2##, whilst the mixed coefficients are zero.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and Dale
Oh... yes Now I see. That was obvious.

Then can you say that tried to keep the form as general as possible? Is that it?

Thank you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
5K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K