1
$\begingroup$

I've seen a few other threads on here inquiring about what is the point of Lagrange Multipliers, or the like. My main question though is, how can I tell by looking at a system in a problem that Lagrange Multipliers would be preferred compared to generalized coordinates. I'm in a theoretical mechanics course, and we are just doing very basic systems (pendulums, points constrained to some shape).

The book I have just outlines Lagrange Multipliers incorporated into the Lagrangian Equation.

$$ \frac{\partial L}{\partial q_j} -\frac{d}{dt}\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q_j}} + \sum_k \lambda_k(t) \frac{\partial f_k}{\partial q_j}=0.$$

The book gives about 2 examples of using these, but I wouldn't know whether or not to use them over just using the regular generalized coordinate example.

References:

  1. Thornton & Marion, Classical Dynamics of Particles and Systems, Fifth Ed.; p.221.
$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

In the context of Lagrange equations

$$\frac{d}{dt}\frac{\partial (T-U)}{\partial \dot{q}^j}-\frac{\partial (T-U)}{\partial q^j}~=~Q_j-\frac{\partial{\cal F}}{\partial\dot{q}^j}+\sum_{\ell=1}^m\lambda^{\ell} a_{\ell j}, \qquad j~\in \{1,\ldots, n\}, \tag{L}$$

in classical mechanics, the Lagrange multipliers are used to impose semi-holonomic constraints

$$\sum_{j=1}^n a_{\ell j}(q,t)\dot{q}^j+a_{\ell t}(q,t)~=~0, \qquad \ell~\in \{1,\ldots, m\}. \tag{SHC}$$

See my Phys.SE answer here for notation.

If a semi-holonomic constraint is holonomic, it is not necessary to implement it via a Lagrange multiplier, except for the case where one is interested in calculating the corresponding constraint force.

References:

  1. H. Goldstein, Classical Mechanics; Chapter 1 & 2.
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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