From 805718880c936d778c99fe0d5cfdb238342a83c7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Prefetch Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2021 22:21:26 +0200 Subject: Expand knowledge base --- .../know/concept/lagrangian-mechanics/index.pdc | 131 +++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 131 insertions(+) create mode 100644 content/know/concept/lagrangian-mechanics/index.pdc (limited to 'content/know/concept/lagrangian-mechanics') diff --git a/content/know/concept/lagrangian-mechanics/index.pdc b/content/know/concept/lagrangian-mechanics/index.pdc new file mode 100644 index 0000000..24e1f93 --- /dev/null +++ b/content/know/concept/lagrangian-mechanics/index.pdc @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@ +--- +title: "Lagrangian mechanics" +firstLetter: "L" +publishDate: 2021-07-01 +categories: +- Physics + +date: 2021-07-01T18:44:43+02:00 +draft: false +markup: pandoc +--- + +# Lagrangian mechanics + +**Lagrangian mechanics** is a formulation of classical mechanics, +which is equivalent to Newton's laws, +but offers some advantages. +Its mathematical backbone is the +[calculus of variations](/know/concept/calculus-of-variations/). + +For a moving object with position $x(t)$ and velocity $\dot{x}(t)$, +we define the Lagrangian $L$ as the difference +between its kinetic and potential energies: + +$$\begin{aligned} + \boxed{ + L(x, \dot{x}, t) \equiv T - V = \frac{1}{2} m \dot{x}^2 - V(x) + } +\end{aligned}$$ + +From variational calculus we then get the Euler-Lagrange equation, +which in this case turns out to just be Newton's second law: + +$$\begin{aligned} + \dv{t} \Big( \pdv{L}{\dot{x}} \Big) = \pdv{L}{x} + \qquad \implies \qquad + m \ddot{x} = - \pdv{V}{x} = F +\end{aligned}$$ + +But compared to Newtonian mechanics, +Lagrangian mechanics scales better for large systems. +For example, to describe the dynamics of $N$ objects $x_1(t), ..., x_N(t)$, +we only need a single $L$ +from which the equations of motion can easily be derived. +Getting these equations directly from Newton's laws could get messy. + +At no point have we assumed Cartesian coordinates: +the Euler-Lagrange equations keep their form +for any independent coordinates $q_1(t), ..., q_N(t)$: + +$$\begin{aligned} + \dv{t} \Big( \pdv{L}{\dot{q_n}} \Big) = \pdv{L}{q_n} +\end{aligned}$$ + +We define the **canonical momentum conjugate** $p_n(t)$ +and the **generalized force conjugate** $F_n(t)$ as follows, +such that we can always get Newton's second law: + +$$\begin{aligned} + \boxed{ + p_n \equiv \pdv{L}{\dot{q}_n} \qquad F_n \equiv \pdv{L}{q_n} + } + \qquad \implies \qquad + \dv{p_n}{t} = F_n +\end{aligned}$$ + +But this is actually a bit misleading, +since $p_n$ need not be a momentum, nor $F_n$ a force, +although often they are. +For example, $p_n$ could be angular momentum, and $F_n$ torque. + +Another advantage of Lagrangian mechanics is that +the conserved quantities can be extracted from $L$ using Noether's theorem. +In the simplest case, if $L$ does not depend on $q_n$ +(then known as a **cyclic coordinate**), +then we know that the "momentum" $p_n$ is a conserved quantity: + +$$\begin{aligned} + F_n = \pdv{L}{q_n} = 0 + \qquad \implies \qquad + \dv{p_n}{t} = 0 +\end{aligned}$$ + +Now, as the number of particles $N$ increases to infinity, +variational calculus will give infinitely many coupled equations, +which is obviously impractical. + +Such a system can be regarded as continuous, so the $N$ functions $q_n$ +can be replaced by a single density function $u(x,t)$. +This approach can also be used for continuous fields, +in which case the complex conjugate $u^*$ is often included. +The Lagrangian $L$ then becomes: + +$$\begin{aligned} + L(u, u^*, u_x, u_x^*, u_t, u_t^*, x, t) + = \int_{-\infty}^\infty \mathcal{L}(u, u^*, u_x, u_x^*, u_t, u_t^*, x, t) \dd{x} +\end{aligned}$$ + +Where $\mathcal{L}$ is known as the **Lagrangian density**. +By inserting this into the functional $J$ +used for the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equations, we get: + +$$\begin{aligned} + J[u] + = \int_{t_0}^{t_1} L \dd{t} + = \int_{t_0}^{t_1} \int_{-\infty}^\infty \mathcal{L} \dd{x} \dd{t} +\end{aligned}$$ + +This is simply 2D variational problem, +so the Euler-Lagrange equations will be two PDEs: + +$$\begin{aligned} + 0 &= \pdv{\mathcal{L}}{u} - \pdv{x} \Big( \pdv{\mathcal{L}}{u_x} \Big) - \pdv{t} \Big( \pdv{\mathcal{L}}{u_t} \Big) + \\ + 0 &= \pdv{\mathcal{L}}{u^*} - \pdv{x} \Big( \pdv{\mathcal{L}}{u_x^*} \Big) - \pdv{t} \Big( \pdv{\mathcal{L}}{u_t^*} \Big) +\end{aligned}$$ + +If $\mathcal{L}$ is real, +then these two Euler-Lagrange equations will in fact be identical. + +Finally, note that for abstract fields, +the Lagrangian density $\mathcal{L}$ rarely has +a physical interpretation, and is not unique. +Instead, it must be reverse-engineered from a relevant equation. + + + +## References +1. R. Shankar, + *Principles of quantum mechanics*, 2nd edition, + Springer. -- cgit v1.2.3