Where Did I Go Wrong in My Analysis of Orbital Motion?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the analysis of orbital motion with a potential function U(r) and the conservation of angular momentum represented by L=mvr. The user initially derived that potential energy depends solely on the radius, leading to confusion about the validity of this conclusion. The user later recognized that the angular momentum expression L=mvr is only applicable in specific cases and does not account for radial velocity, which is crucial for a complete analysis. The Lagrangian formulation was also referenced, highlighting the importance of considering both radial and angular components of motion.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of classical mechanics, specifically orbital motion
  • Familiarity with Lagrangian mechanics and the Lagrangian function
  • Knowledge of angular momentum and its conservation
  • Basic calculus for derivatives and motion equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Lagrangian for polar coordinates in orbital motion
  • Learn about the relationship between potential energy and central forces
  • Investigate the implications of angular momentum conservation in non-circular orbits
  • Explore the concept of effective potential in orbital mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, particularly those studying classical mechanics, and anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of orbital motion and Lagrangian dynamics.

Hertz
Messages
180
Reaction score
8
Hi, I stumbled upon this while working on a problem on my physics homework. I still want to solve the problem myself if possible though so I won't post it here, instead, I'll post what is confusing me.

Consider orbital motion with potential U(r), where U(r) is any arbitrary function of r.
I was able to show that the quantity [itex]L=mvr[/itex] is conserved and I will call it L. Thus:
[itex]v=\frac{L}{mr}[/itex]

We know that the system has a total energy that is constant:
[itex]E=T+U[/itex]
[itex]E=\frac{mv^2}{2}+U(r)[/itex]
[itex]U(r)=E-\frac{mv^2}{2}[/itex]
[itex]U(r)=E-\frac{m}{2} \frac{L^2}{(mr)^2}[/itex]

This shows that potential is only dependent on radius. Everything else is a constant. Furthermore, it shows that potential as a function of radius is ALWAYS equal to the same thing... This simply cannot be true... Where am I going wrong?

edit-
The problem that I'm working on gives me a function [itex]r(\theta)[/itex] and asks "What central force is responsible for this motion".

Using the method above... I'm finding that F(r) is the same thing no matter what [itex]r(\theta)[/itex] is... (By taking the negative derivative of U(r) with respect to r.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The angular momentum is L=mvr only for special cases. Write it for the general case and you will get a more general result.
 
nasu said:
The angular momentum is L=mvr only for special cases. Write it for the general case and you will get a more general result.

Hmm, well this is why I thought it was for general U, maybe you can help me see what I did wrong:

[itex]L_{Lagrangian}=\frac{1}{2}mv^2-U(r)[/itex]

In polar, [itex]v^2=\dot{r}^2+r^2\dot{\theta}^2[/itex]

[itex]L=\frac{1}{2}m(\dot{r}^2+r^2\dot{\theta}^2)-U(r)[/itex]

And then in my text I found these equations:

[itex]\frac{\partial L}{\dot{q}_i}=p_i[/itex]

[itex]\frac{\partial L}{q_i}=\dot{p}_i[/itex]

(Not quite sure why they're true yet)

which implies:
[itex]\frac{d}{dt}(\frac{\partial L}{\dot{q}_i})=\frac{\partial L}{q_i}[/itex]

Applied to Lagrangian above:
[itex]\frac{d}{dt}(\frac{\partial L}{\dot{\theta}})=\frac{\partial L}{\theta}[/itex]
[itex]\frac{d}{dt}(mr^2\dot{\theta})=0[/itex]
[itex]mr^2\dot{\theta}=const=mr(r\dot{\theta})=mvr=l[/itex]

-edit
I do see the problem now though! In this expression, this is only velocity in the theta direction. It doesn't account for velocity in the r direction, so I can't use it in the OP. Thanks :)
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
335
Views
17K