Newton equations, second order equation and (im)possible motions - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net 2013-05-23T06:13:34Z http://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/43292 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdf http://mathoverflow.net/questions/43292/newton-equations-second-order-equation-and-impossible-motions Newton equations, second order equation and (im)possible motions student 2010-10-23T12:33:44Z 2013-03-28T20:33:12Z <p>I am am currently studying Newtonian mechanics from a conceptional and axiomatic point of view. Now, if I am not mistaken, one (but surely not all) statement of Newtons second law about nature is, that (almost ?) every motion of a "classical particle" (or "small body") can be described by a <em>second order</em> differential equation on $\mathbb{R}^3$ (or $\mathbb{R}^{3n}$ if one considers a <em>system</em> of $n$ particles). That is, if $I \ni t \mapsto x(t) \in \mathbb{R}^{3n}$ is a motion of $n$ particles in some environment, there is a smooth function $f \colon \mathbb{R}^{3n} \times \mathbb{R}^{3n} \times \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}^{3n}$ (which describes the influence of the environment) such that $\ddot x(t) = f(x(t),\dot x(t), t)$ for all $t \in I$, thereby $I$ is an interval and $\dot x$ denotes the derivative of $x$. </p> <p>Now my question is, if there is a good, mathematical sound intuition, which kinds motions are <em>not</em> allowed by Newtons second law because of the fact that it is a <em>second</em> order differential equation.</p> <p>In other words: I want to analyze in detail, what Newtons seconds law tells us about nature. Especially I want to grasp, how the condition to be a second order differential equation gives restrictions to possible conceivable motions of particles. What would be allowed additionally if the equations were of $3$. or higher order?</p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/43292/newton-equations-second-order-equation-and-impossible-motions/43296#43296 Answer by Denis Serre for Newton equations, second order equation and (im)possible motions Denis Serre 2010-10-23T13:32:24Z 2010-10-23T15:43:14Z <p>When you play billiard, there are collisions, in which you observe (approximately because of the friction of the carpet, but this can be avoided in more careful experiments) the conservation of mass (the number of balls remain constant), linear momentum (the sum of the velocities) and of energy (the sum of the square of velocities). If the balls have different masses, this has to be pondered by the respective masses. This is confirmed experimentally in system with so many particles that they appear to be continua, even if we have to introduce an internal energy in order to model the fluctations of velocities (the mean of the square is larger than the square of the mean, due to Cauchy-Schwarz). Thus Newtonian Physics is, on a large part, a science of conservation of mass, momentum and energy. Notice that in absence of collision, this conservtion holds true for individual particles, and this means that they move with a constant velocity. The motion of a free particle thus obeys the equation $x''(t)=0$.</p> <p>In presence of an external field, the total energy is likely to be the sum of the kinetic energy $\frac12m|x'|^2$ that the particle would have in absence of the field, and a term representing the interaction between the particle and the field. Presumably, the total energy the form $E=\frac12m|x'|^2+V(x,x')$, and it is a constant of the motion. Only second order differential equations may be compatible with such first-order conservation laws. At best, an ODE of order $n$ may imply that a first-order expression like $E$ satisfy an ODE of order $n-1$. This implies constancy only if $n=2$.</p> <p>This explanation is valid also for the PDEs occuring in classical Physics, like Laplace and wave equations. By-products are the inverse square law of the gravitational force (again, Newton) and the Huyghens principle for the propagation of light. Of course, things become much more complex at relativistic and/or quantic regimes. But even then, most equations are second-order because of the presence of frist-order conserved quantities. For instance, the number of particles and the momentum in quantum mechanics are, up to constants, given by $$\int_{{\mathbb R}^3}|\psi|^2dx,\qquad\Re\int_{{\mathbb R}^3}\bar\psi\nabla\psi dx.$$</p> <p>Needless to say, the first-order conservation laws associated with equations from Physics is the starting point in their mathematical analysis.</p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/43292/newton-equations-second-order-equation-and-impossible-motions/43297#43297 Answer by Andrey Rekalo for Newton equations, second order equation and (im)possible motions Andrey Rekalo 2010-10-23T13:38:38Z 2010-10-23T14:06:59Z <p>Newton's second law implies basically that the evolution of a mechanical system is completely determined as soon as the particles' initial positions $x(0)$ and velocities $\dot x(0)$ are specified. Since this is a second order equation, the corresponding Cauchy problem $$\begin{cases}\ddot x(t) = f(x(t),\dot x(t), t), &amp;\ t>0 \\ x(0)=x_0, \\ \dot x(0)=y_0,\end{cases}\qquad\qquad(*)$$ has a unique local in time solution for any initial data $(x_0,y_0)$ if $f(x,y,t)$ is a Lipschitz function w.r.t. $(x,y)$ (which is almost always the case in applications). </p> <p>As for possible complexity of motions, there are no obstacles to completely chaotic behaviour of solutions to system $(*)$ whatsoever, provided that $f(x,y,t)$ is a nonlinear function w.r.t $(x,y)$ and any of the following conditions is satisfied:</p> <ul> <li>the number of interacting particles $n\geq 3$;</li> <li>the forcing term is nonconservative;</li> <li>the system is essentially nonautonomous (i.e. $\partial_t f(x,y,t)\neq0$ identically). </li> </ul> <p>Just google "chaos in classical mechanics" for numerous examples of innocent looking mechanical systems exhibiting wildly exotic dynamics.</p> <p><strong>Edit.</strong> See also a somewhat related MO question <a href="http://mathoverflow.net/questions/8396/does-every-ode-comes-from-something-in-physics" rel="nofollow"><em>Does every ODE comes from something in physics?</em></a>.</p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/43292/newton-equations-second-order-equation-and-impossible-motions/43307#43307 Answer by Dick Palais for Newton equations, second order equation and (im)possible motions Dick Palais 2010-10-23T14:54:44Z 2010-10-23T15:11:42Z <p>Actually, Newton did NOT say that $F = m a$ (i.e., ${d^2 x \over dt^2} = {1\over m} F$) in the Principia. First of all, if he did, no one at that time would have understood what it meant since that was pre-calculus times. What he did say in his 2nd Law was that "Change of motion is proportional to impressed motive force and is in the same direction as the impressed force", i.e., in modern terminology, the instantaneous change of momentum (caused by something like a hammer blow) is equal to the applied impulse. Whenever he used the 2nd Law, he treated a smooth force as the limit of a large number of small impulses. It was only much later that Euler recast the 2nd Law as a 2nd order ODE. This is all discussed in considerable detail in a recent book Differential Equations, Mechanics, and Computation'' (that I co-authored with my son Robert). There is a "Web Companion" for the book at the URL <a href="http://ode-math.com" rel="nofollow">http://ode-math.com</a> where you can freely download more than half the book as pdf files. In particular, if you download the first pages of "Chapter 4: Newton's Equations" you will see all of this discussed in considerable detail. One more point: this book was explicitly written to be, as we stress, a conceptual introduction to the subject for someone like yourself who is learning this material for the first time. (See here: <a href="http://ode-math.com/NovelFeaturesOfODECM.html" rel="nofollow">http://ode-math.com/NovelFeaturesOfODECM.html</a>)</p> <p>All of the above is somewhat tangential to your specific question, so let me add that a very major restriction imposed by saying that the laws of motion for say $n$ particles are (equivalent to) 2nd order ODE is that if you know the positions and velocities of the particles at any one instant then their positions at any time in the past and future are uniquely determined by that data. Or as Laplace said in a very famous quote "The current state of Nature is evidently a consequence of what it was in the preceding moment, and if we conceive of an intelligence that at a given moment knows the relations of all things of this Universe, it could then tell the positions, motions and effects of all of these entities at any past or future time. . ." (Of course we now know that the existence of "chaotic behavior" renders that only a very theoretical possibility.)</p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/43292/newton-equations-second-order-equation-and-impossible-motions/43402#43402 Answer by Christian Blatter for Newton equations, second order equation and (im)possible motions Christian Blatter 2010-10-24T17:31:02Z 2010-10-24T17:31:02Z <p>This is a very deep (or philosophical) question. It seems that in mechanical systems a "tension" (e.g., a plucking of a string) gives rise to an ${\bf acceleration}$ proportional to the "tension", while, e.g., in heat conduction a "tension" (i.e., a temperature gradient) gives rise to a ${\bf velocity}$ proportional to the "tension".</p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/43292/newton-equations-second-order-equation-and-impossible-motions/111356#111356 Answer by jbc for Newton equations, second order equation and (im)possible motions jbc 2012-11-03T09:44:55Z 2012-11-03T09:44:55Z <p>I suspect that the work of Kasner and his students is what you might want. They discuss the differential-geometrical properties of those curves which can arise as the trajectories of second order differential equations. Kasner published a resum\'e of his results in the monograph "Natural families of trajectories" which is still available, perhaps at the Cornell site. Many of the original articles appeared in the Transactions and are also available on internet.</p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/43292/newton-equations-second-order-equation-and-impossible-motions/125677#125677 Answer by Andreas Rüdinger for Newton equations, second order equation and (im)possible motions Andreas Rüdinger 2013-03-26T22:10:28Z 2013-03-26T22:10:28Z <p>Regarding your question "What would be allowed additionally if the equations were of 3. or higher order?" I would like to mention that the equation you get in classical physics if you consider the effect of an electron's own electromagnetic on itself involves a time derivative of the acceleration, cf. e.g. equation (1) in <a href="http://www.philsoc.org/1962Spring/1526transcript.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.philsoc.org/1962Spring/1526transcript.html</a>, and especially remark (III). If I remember it right, more can find in the standard book on classical electrodynamics, Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics. </p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/43292/newton-equations-second-order-equation-and-impossible-motions/125692#125692 Answer by Ben Crowell for Newton equations, second order equation and (im)possible motions Ben Crowell 2013-03-27T04:03:43Z 2013-03-27T04:03:43Z <p>The way the question is asked doesn't quite work, because it leads to a trivial answer. The question is "which kinds motions are not allowed by Newton's second law because of the fact that it is a second order differential equation" of the form $\ddot{x}=f(x,\dot{x},t)$. The answer is that essentially any motion is allowed. Give me any twice-differentiable function for $x$, and I can simply define an $f$ for you that depends only on $t$, and equals $\ddot{x}$. Then $x$ is a solution of an equation of the given form.</p> <p>You can get more interesting possibilities by restricting the form of $f$. For example, if the differential equation is required to have the form $\ddot{x}=f(x,\dot{x})$, with no explicit time dependence, then you can rule out any motion that visits the same point twice, with the same velocity, but doesn't repeat itself. This essentially says that experiments are reproducible, if you set up the same conditions with the particle at the same position and velocity.</p> <p>Besides the form of $f$ (which things it depends on), the continuity properties of $f$ also make a difference. If $f$ has no explicit time dependence but isn't Lipschitz continuous, then you can get solutions that violate causality. There is a famous example of this type known as Norton’s dome, which you can find out about by googling. The idea is that you can have a motion defined by $x=0$ for $t\le T$, and $x=(t-T)^4$ for $t\ge T$. Regardless of the value of $T$, the function $f(x)$ is the same. In other words, you have a particle that just sits in a certain spot for a long time, and then one day it decides to move. This makes experiments not reproducible. However, there are fundamental reasons why you can't actually create a system with this behavior.</p> <p>In quantum mechanics, it does matter what order your derivatives are. If you have a Lagrangian that depends on higher derivatives, you get an energy spectrum that's not bounded below. Google "higher derivative theories."</p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/43292/newton-equations-second-order-equation-and-impossible-motions/125852#125852 Answer by SHAFIULLAH for Newton equations, second order equation and (im)possible motions SHAFIULLAH 2013-03-28T20:33:12Z 2013-03-28T20:33:12Z <p>The posed question is: "Which kinds motions are not allowed by Newtons second law because of the fact that it is a second order" differential equation". and the given answer is the motion of an Electron in spherical domain around center of force like that of Hydrogen Atom because the 2nd derivative of Position vector has only 2 components, one along the Tangent and the other along normal to the trajectory and thus equating 2nd derivative to force implies that the trajectory instantaneously aligns with the force which may not be always true because the force may have another component along the bi-normal to the trajectory. Dirac Equation like Newtons 2nd Law is First order in momentum and not for position vector but the question refers to 2nd order equation of Newtons Law which is for the Position vector only .Let any one reply my question as to how a material body can move around a surface of radius r around a center of force? A traditional physicist will say that this question also does not make sense because he can not answer but such motion do occur in nature like that of the electron tracing its path in 1s ,2s-- orbitals with zero resultant Angular momentum in Hydrogen like atoms? There is no way to answer this question than to generalize the Newtons 2nd Law relating the force ( Aristotelian Force, the mover and not the Newtonian force) to 3rd or higher derivatives of the position vector which has all 3 components along Tangent, Normal and Bi-normal of the trajectory. </p>