Why Use a Trigonometric Substitution for a Free-Fall Problem?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DThielke
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Free-fall Gravity
DThielke
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Problem background:
  • Body free-falling towards the earth.
  • Account for variation in gravitational force with height.
  • Neglect air resistance.
  • Initial conditions summarized by total energy E.

I'm having trouble understanding part of my textbook's solution to this problem, so I will paraphrase said solution up until I have trouble. My comments are in bold.

Beginning with

F=-\frac{mMG}{x^2},​

it can be shown that

V(x)=-\frac{mMG}{x}.​

By application of conservation of energy, we determine

v=\frac{dx}{dt}=\sqrt{\frac{2}{m}}\left[E-V(x)\right]^\frac{1}{2}=\sqrt{\frac{2}{m}}\left[E+\frac{mMG}{x}\right]^\frac{1}{2}.​

In order to find x(t), we must evaluate

\int^x_{x_0}\frac{dx}{\left(E+\frac{mMG}{x}\right)^\frac{1}{2}}=\sqrt{\frac{2}{m}}t.​

I can easily follow the math up to this point, but the next step in the textbook solution throws me off.

To solve the case when E is negative, substitute

\cos{\theta}=\sqrt{\frac{-Ex}{mMG}},​

and we arrive at

\frac{mMG}{\left(-E\right)^\frac{3}{2}}\int^\theta_{\theta_0}2\cos^2\theta d\theta=\sqrt{\frac{2}{m}}t.​

If I assume this substitution to be valid, I can easily follow the rest of the textbook to the solution. However, where does this seemingly random substitution come from? And can anyone show how it is mathematically applied to the integral? I don't feel right blindly accepting the trig substitution and would appreciate clarification.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Because you say E is negative ==> -E > 0.

Lets consider:

<br /> \sqrt{E + \frac{mMG}{x}} = \sqrt{(-E)(-1 + \frac{mMG}{-Ex}<br />

From this point, you should imagine that you need substitution to solve this integral. Usually, the best way to solve du/(1-u^2) is using trigonometry. You can try to put cos/sin(u) = sqrt(mMG\-Ex) and then using a substitution from your textbook you will find that which way is more better.

The more practice you do with this type of integral, the more sense you have when you find a best way, that's my exp.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top