A Why is this matrix symmetric here?

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter Kashmir
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix Symmetric
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the symmetry of the matrix ##\mathbf{T}## in the context of Lagrangian mechanics, specifically in relation to kinetic energy expressed as a quadratic form. It is established that the kinetic energy can be represented in a form that leads to a symmetric matrix ##\mathbf{A}##, which is derived from the particle velocities and their dependencies on generalized coordinates and time. The symmetry arises from the properties of the quadratic form ##\dot{\mathbf{q}}^T \mathbf{A} \dot{\mathbf{q}}##, which is homogeneous and reflects the nature of kinetic energy in the system. The discussion also references the implications of moving constraints on the kinetic energy formulation. Understanding this symmetry is crucial for analyzing the dynamics of systems described by such Lagrangians.
Kashmir
Messages
466
Reaction score
74
Goldstein 3rd Ed, pg 339

"In large classes of problems, it happens that ##L_{2}## is a quadratic function of the generalized velocities and ##L_{1}## is a linear function of the same variables with the following specific functional dependencies:
##L\left(q_{i}, \dot{q}_{i}, t\right)=L_{0}(q, t)+\dot{q}_{i} a_{i}(q, t)+\dot{q}_{i}^{2} T_{i}(q, t)##

where the ##a_{i}^{\prime} s##and the ##T_{i}##'s are functions of the ##q## 's and ##t##.

Under the given assumptions the Lagrangian can be written as##L(q, \dot{q}, t)=L_{0}(q, t)+\tilde{\dot{q}} \mathbf{a}+\frac{1}{2} \tilde{\mathbf{q}} \mathbf{T} \dot{\mathbf{q}}##"

It's then said that ##\mathbf{T}## is symmetric.
Why is it symmetric? Is it because it's always diagonal? The author didn't say that,instead says it's just a n by n square matrix.

Please give me a hint or an answer. Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
With moving (i.e. time-dependent) constraints ##\mathbf{r}_a = \mathbf{r}_a(\mathbf{q},t)##, the kinetic energy is indeed generally of the form ##T = \dot{\mathbf{q}}^T \mathbf{A} \dot{\mathbf{q}} + \mathbf{B}^T \dot{\mathbf{q}} + C##, where ##\mathbf{A}##, ##\mathbf{B}## and C are all functions of ##\mathbf{q}## and ##t##.

This follows from the expression ##\dot{\mathbf{r}}_a = \sum_i \dfrac{\partial \mathbf{r}_a}{\partial q^i} \dot{q}^i + \dfrac{\partial \mathbf{r}_a}{\partial t}## for the particle velocities. Using this to write out the kinetic energy ##T = \frac{1}{2} \sum_a m_a \dot{\mathbf{r}}_a \cdot \dot{\mathbf{r}}_a## of the system, do you see why ##A_{ij} = A_{ji}## (i.e. ##\mathbf{A}## is a symmetric matrix and the quadratic form ##\dot{\mathbf{q}}^T \mathbf{A} \dot{\mathbf{q}}## is homogeneous?).
 
  • Like
Likes Kashmir and vanhees71
ergospherical said:
With moving (i.e. time-dependent) constraints ##\mathbf{r}_a = \mathbf{r}_a(\mathbf{q},t)##, the kinetic energy is indeed generally of the form ##T = \dot{\mathbf{q}}^T \mathbf{A} \dot{\mathbf{q}} + \mathbf{B}^T \dot{\mathbf{q}} + C##, where ##\mathbf{A}##, ##\mathbf{B}## and C are all functions of ##\mathbf{q}## and ##t##.

This follows from the expression ##\dot{\mathbf{r}}_a = \sum_i \dfrac{\partial \mathbf{r}_a}{\partial q^i} \dot{q}^i + \dfrac{\partial \mathbf{r}_a}{\partial t}## for the particle velocities. Using this to write out the kinetic energy ##T = \frac{1}{2} \sum_a m_a \dot{\mathbf{r}}_a \cdot \dot{\mathbf{r}}_a## of the system, do you see why ##A_{ij} = A_{ji}## (i.e. ##\mathbf{A}## is a symmetric matrix and the quadratic form ##\dot{\mathbf{q}}^T \mathbf{A} \dot{\mathbf{q}}## is homogeneous?).
Thankyou sir.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top