Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Goldstein's Classical Mechanics says that a cyclic coordinate is one that doesn't appear in the Lagrangian of the system, even though its generalized velocity may appear in it (emphasis mine). For example, in the the equation $$L=\frac{1}{2}m\bigl[\dot r^2+r\dot \theta^2+r^2\dot \phi^2\sin^2\theta\bigr]\tag1$$ $\phi$ is the cyclic coordinate.

My question is: If the last term in equation (1) were missing, would $\phi$ still be a cyclic coordinate, and how would we know? What I'm asking is, how would we identify that a coordinate is cyclic if its generalized velocity was not present to give us a hint?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

You can consider whatever coordinates are describing your system. The Lagrangian you wrote (which I'm assuming is supposed to have two powers of $r$ in the second term) is for a free particle in spherical coordinates, and so you probably knew before writing it down that you were dealing with $(r, \theta, \phi)$.

Of course, if you ever write down a Lagrangian and neither the coordinate nor its time derivative appear, it probably means you introduced an unnecessary coordinate. For instance, suppose you had $$L = \frac{1}{2} m \Big(\dot{r}^2 + r^2 \dot{\theta}^2\Big),$$ as you suggested. Then the Euler-Lagrange equation will simply be $0 = 0$ for anything other than $r$ or $\theta$. Nothing interesting is happening to any other coordinates, which we can formally call cyclic, even if the kinetic and potential energies might independently rely on them.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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