A Explicit non-holonomic equations of motion

AI Thread Summary
In the discussion on explicit non-holonomic equations of motion, participants explore the challenges of formulating these equations compared to holonomic cases. It is noted that while Lagrange multipliers are essential for addressing non-holonomic constraints, existing literature, including Landau and Lifshitz, may not provide comprehensive guidance. The focus is on finding a general form for the equations of motion, as non-holonomic constraints are local and cannot be resolved by merely selecting independent coordinates. Participants express a desire for a more explicit formulation beyond the standard Euler-Lagrange equations. The conversation emphasizes the complexity of integrating non-holonomic constraints into the motion equations.
andresB
Messages
625
Reaction score
374
In the holonomic case, we can put the Lagrangian in the Lagrange equations to obtain the explicit form of the equations of motion. From Greenwood's classical dynamics book, the equations are
1661995443042.png


Are there such general equations for the non-holonomic case?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Have a look in Landau Lifshitz vol. 1, who gets the non-holonomic constraints right. You have to introduce Lagrange multipliers in the right way!
 
vanhees71 said:
Have a look in Landau Lifshitz vol. 1, who gets the non-holonomic constraints right. You have to introduce Lagrange multipliers in the right way!

Long time without reading Landau, and I have to say that its treatment of the non-holonomic constraint seems disappointingly scarce.

In any case, I'm not looking for the Euler-Lagrange+ lagrange multipliers equations, they are in every book. Instead I'm lookinf for the final general form of the equation of motion.
 
But these are the final general form of the equation of motion. Non-holonomic constraints are local constraints, and you cannot satisfy them by simply choosing a set of independent coordinates as for holonomic constraints.
 
vanhees71 said:
But these are the final general form of the equation of motion. Non-holonomic constraints are local constraints, and you cannot satisfy them by simply choosing a set of independent coordinates as for holonomic constraints.

But the Lagrange equations are just a step in the final solution of the problem. They have to be solved togheter with the non-holonomic constraint equations. I know how to do it in specific examples that can be found in the standard books, but I would be surprised if no general explicit formulat exist.
 
Consider an extremely long and perfectly calibrated scale. A car with a mass of 1000 kg is placed on it, and the scale registers this weight accurately. Now, suppose the car begins to move, reaching very high speeds. Neglecting air resistance and rolling friction, if the car attains, for example, a velocity of 500 km/h, will the scale still indicate a weight corresponding to 1000 kg, or will the measured value decrease as a result of the motion? In a second scenario, imagine a person with a...
Scalar and vector potentials in Coulomb gauge Assume Coulomb gauge so that $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A}=0.\tag{1}$$ The scalar potential ##\phi## is described by Poisson's equation $$\nabla^2 \phi = -\frac{\rho}{\varepsilon_0}\tag{2}$$ which has the instantaneous general solution given by $$\phi(\mathbf{r},t)=\frac{1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\int \frac{\rho(\mathbf{r}',t)}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|}d^3r'.\tag{3}$$ In Coulomb gauge the vector potential ##\mathbf{A}## is given by...
Thread 'Griffith, Electrodynamics, 4th Edition, Example 4.8. (First part)'
I am reading the Griffith, Electrodynamics book, 4th edition, Example 4.8 and stuck at some statements. It's little bit confused. > Example 4.8. Suppose the entire region below the plane ##z=0## in Fig. 4.28 is filled with uniform linear dielectric material of susceptibility ##\chi_e##. Calculate the force on a point charge ##q## situated a distance ##d## above the origin. Solution : The surface bound charge on the ##xy## plane is of opposite sign to ##q##, so the force will be...
Back
Top