0
$\begingroup$

I'm trying to derive the conservation of energy in 3D from the equation $\vec{F}=m\vec{a}$.

David Morin, in his book "Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions" p. 138-139, proves the conservation of energy in 1D in the following way:

enter image description here

I wanted to prove the 3D version in the same way, so I got the term

$$\int_C m\vec{v} \cdot d\vec{v}$$

or, if parametrized,

$$\int_{t_0}^t m\vec{v}(t) \cdot \frac{d\vec{v}(t)}{dt} \ dt$$

This should obviously yield $$\frac{1}{2}m|\vec{v(t)}|^2 - \frac{1}{2}m|\vec{v(t_0)}|^2.$$

But what I'm wondering is, how do I deal with the dot product? Please see the diagram below.

enter image description here

The angle between $d\vec{v}$ and $\vec{v}$ looks too complicated to be taken into account at infinitesimal level. (and note that even $d\theta$ is not the angle between these two)

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Notice \begin{align} \frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt} (v(t)\cdot v(t)) = 2v'(t)\cdot v(t) \end{align} $\endgroup$ – Jacky Chong Jun 25 at 2:41
  • $\begingroup$ @JackyChong Thanks. I see how I can apply integration by parts to obtain the desired result. Can you also comment on the direction of $d\vec{v}$ please? $\endgroup$ – curious Jun 25 at 3:46
  • $\begingroup$ Technically conservation of energy is a more fundamental principle than even Newton's laws of motion. It's a bit strange to derive the former from the latter. But that is more of a Physics concern than a mathematical one. $\endgroup$ – Deepak Jun 25 at 3:51
  • $\begingroup$ @Deepak Why is it? Isn't $F=ma$ the governing equation of Newtonian Mechanics? $\endgroup$ – curious Jun 25 at 4:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @curious It is a key equation (I wouldn't use the word "governing") in Newtonian mechanics. But conservation of energy is a far more general principle - it applies not just to mechanics but practically everything - thermodynamics, electromagnetism etc. With consideration of mass-energy equivalence, it also applies to Special and General Relativity. That's why I said conservation of energy is a much more fundamental principle. Newtonian mechanics is not a perfectly accurate description of the natural world (as we understand it) but that doesn't affect the validity of conservation. $\endgroup$ – Deepak Jun 25 at 7:58
2
$\begingroup$

You can write the $d\vec v$ in terms of the components along $\vec v$ and perpendicular to it. $$d\vec v=d|\vec v| \hat v+v d\theta\hat\theta$$ When you multiply with $\vec v=|\vec v|\hat v$, the second term will wanish. So all you need to consider is the radial component (1 dimension)

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Wow! Perfect! What a genius mathematician! Thanks a bunch. $\endgroup$ – curious Jun 25 at 3:53

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.