I Writing the Lagrangians for different frames depending on how "the ball is dropped"

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on checking the homogeneity of vertical space using Lagrangians in the context of a dropped ball. Two Lagrangians are presented, illustrating passive transformations based on the relationship between different frames of reference. The first question addresses whether the Lagrangians represent passive transformations, while the second question explores how to write Lagrangians for active transformations involving different drop heights. The original poster expresses a desire to clarify their understanding and requests the closure of a previous thread deemed incorrectly framed. The thread concludes with confirmation of the closure and acknowledgment of the poster's resolution.
gionole
Messages
281
Reaction score
24
I wanna be checking homogeneity of space(only interested in vertical) for simplicity and example we can do is "ball is dropped". To check homogeneity, we use either passive or active transformation and I'm interested in lagrangians.

I heard that we can write lagrangians such as: ##L = \frac{1}{2}m\dot q^2 - mgy## and ##L' = \frac{1}{2} m\dot q'^2 - mg(y'+a)##. This comes from the fact that ##y = y'+a##. (we seem to have y and y' frame).

Question 1: it seems to me that lagrangians that I wrote are an example of passive transformation, because of ##y = y'+a##. It's like the ball is only dropped from single location(one experiment), but we write lagrangians for the ball such as seen from each frame. Is this right ? as in, am I right that this is passive, or can we also call it active ?

Question 2: Active transformation seems such as ball must be dropped from 2 different locations(2 different locations). So we drop a ball from some height, and then we move up and drop it from higher location. How would we go about writing Lagrangians for each experiment ? using the same lagrangians as shown above doesn't seem correct to me, as I think it's passive.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
@berkeman would love to remove that thread as the question there is not asked correctly. but i can't delete it.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
gionole said:
@berkeman would love to remove that thread as the question there is not asked correctly. but i can't delete it.
Okay, I closed off the previous thread with a note pointing to this improved version here.
 
@berkeman can you close this as well ? Don't want people to spend time on it. I've figured it out. Thanks.
 
Sure, thanks for the heads-up. I've closed off this thread now; I'm glad that you figured it out.
 
  • Like
Likes gionole
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
64
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top