Timeline for Using Lagrangian mechanics instead of Newtonian mechanics [duplicate]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 29, 2018 at 16:51 | history | closed | Qmechanic♦ | Duplicate of What is the difference between Newtonian and Lagrangian mechanics in a nutshell? | |
| Jan 18, 2015 at 7:43 | comment | added | Qmechanic♦ | Possible duplicates: physics.stackexchange.com/q/8903/2451 and links therein. | |
| Jan 18, 2015 at 7:37 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body; edited tags; edited title
|
| Jan 18, 2015 at 2:32 | answer | added | theage | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 18, 2015 at 2:30 | comment | added | mmesser314 | From David Tong's site at damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/dynamics/two.pdf "... there are two very important reasons for working with Lagrange’s equations rather than Newton’s. The first is that Lagrange’s equations hold in any coordinate system, while Newton’s are restricted to an inertial frame. The second is the ease with which we can deal with constraints in the Lagrangian system." | |
| Jan 18, 2015 at 0:54 | comment | added | Mark Mitchison | If you know the position as a function of time, then the problem is already solved! Usually one does not initially know the position at any time. Rather, you have some dynamical data, such as the positions of sources of various kinds of fields which act upon your particle. This allows you to calculate the potential seen by the particle, and thus use the Lagrangian (or Newtonian mechanics) to calculate its position. | |
| Jan 18, 2015 at 0:45 | comment | added | Kyle Kanos | Try solving the equations of motion of a double pendulum using Newtonian mechanics, then try it using Lagrangian mechanics. Which is easier? | |
| Jan 18, 2015 at 0:29 | history | edited | TanMath | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Jan 18, 2015 at 0:26 | history | edited | DanielSank | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Math formatting
|
| Jan 18, 2015 at 0:22 | history | asked | TanMath | CC BY-SA 3.0 |