Timeline for Deriving the differential equation of simple harmonic motion through energy conservation equation
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 11 at 7:06 | comment | added | Qmechanic♦ | I updated the answer. | |
| Oct 11 at 7:05 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added explanation
|
| Oct 10 at 18:40 | comment | added | User198 | I wrongly used the word "implication" (English is not my first language). I meant to ask, regarding your 3. point: Why does Energy conservation imply Lagrange equation for 1D? | |
| Oct 9 at 17:53 | comment | added | User198 | Ah sorry. Than I didn't understand you properly. | |
| Oct 9 at 17:50 | comment | added | Qmechanic♦ | 2. No. 4. This is a misquote. | |
| Oct 9 at 17:47 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added explanation
|
| Oct 9 at 17:40 | comment | added | User198 | 4. Why does Energy conservation work as an implication of the Lagrange equation for $n=1$ but not for $n\geq 2$? 5. If it makes sense to make that question even? I don't want to question why to much to not fall into a loophole. | |
| Oct 9 at 17:40 | comment | added | User198 | "Energy conservation implies Lagrange equation (via time differentiation)."(for 1 DOF). This sounds really interesting. 1. Does this statement have a specific name? 2. Is it an if and only if statement? 3. I was looking at some of the other answers to this question and one of them concludes: "Thus, $\frac{dH}{dt}=0$ is true (under a few restrictions) if and only if $\frac{d q}{d t}=\frac{\partial H}{\partial p}$ and $\frac{d p}{d t}=-\frac{\partial H}{\partial q}$ are also true." But you seem to say that the Conservation of energy is an implication of the Lagrange equation. | |
| Oct 9 at 17:14 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added explanation
|
| Oct 9 at 16:53 | history | answered | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |