0
$\begingroup$

Consider a system of $N$ particles subject to forces $\vec F_i\ (i=1\dots N)$ that derive from a potential $V$. My lecture notes propose a simple proof that

$$Q_j = -\frac{\partial V}{\partial q_j}$$

where the generalized forces are defined as $Q_j = \sum_i \vec F_i\cdot\frac{\partial\vec r_i}{\partial q_j}$. It goes like this:

$$ Q_j = \sum_i \vec F_i\cdot\frac{\partial\vec r_i}{\partial q_j} = -\sum_i\vec\nabla_i V\cdot\frac{\partial\vec r_i}{\partial q_j} = -\frac{\partial V}{\partial q_j} $$

I'm trying to understand the last step in detail, but I get a wrong answer by a factor $N$. For example with two particles, and writing $\vec r_i = (x_i,y_i,z_i)$, I have $$ \begin{aligned} \sum_i\vec\nabla_i V\cdot\frac{\partial\vec r_i}{\partial q_j} &= \vec\nabla_1V\cdot\frac{\partial\vec r_1}{\partial q_j} + \vec\nabla_2V\cdot\frac{\partial\vec r_2}{\partial q_j} \\ &= (\tfrac{\partial V}{\partial x_1}, \tfrac{\partial V}{\partial y_1}, \tfrac{\partial V}{\partial z_1}) \cdot(\tfrac{\partial x_1}{\partial q_j}, \tfrac{\partial y_1}{\partial q_j}, \tfrac{\partial z_1}{\partial q_j}) + (\tfrac{\partial V}{\partial x_2}, \tfrac{\partial V}{\partial y_2}, \tfrac{\partial V}{\partial z_2}) \cdot(\tfrac{\partial x_2}{\partial q_j}, \tfrac{\partial y_2}{\partial q_j}, \tfrac{\partial z_2}{\partial q_j}) \\[1ex] &= \frac{\partial V}{\partial q_j} + \frac{\partial V}{\partial q_j} \\[1ex] &= 2\frac{\partial V}{\partial q_j} \end{aligned} $$ What did I do wrong to get this factor 2?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ There's already a question on the same result (or very close) but a with a different proof: physics.stackexchange.com/q/271213 . But I'm really trying to understand this proof. $\endgroup$ – alfba Apr 16 '19 at 14:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is just the chain rule of calculus applied to a function of more than one variable. There is no factor 6. $\endgroup$ – user197851 Apr 16 '19 at 14:40
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, that corrects a factor 3 (I edited the question accordingly). But I'm still wrong by a factor $N$ (factor 2 in the example). $\endgroup$ – alfba Apr 16 '19 at 15:03
  • $\begingroup$ (As Pedro Fernando made clear, I was confused about the $V$ function, it's "just the chain rule" as you say :-). ) $\endgroup$ – alfba Apr 16 '19 at 15:21
0
$\begingroup$

The problem is that you are making incorrect use of the chain rule for derivatives. In the last step

$$\frac{\partial V}{\partial q_{j}}=\sum_{i}\frac{\partial V}{\partial x_{i}}\frac{\partial x_{i}}{\partial q_{j}}=\frac{\partial V}{\partial x_{1}}\frac{\partial x_{1}}{\partial q_{j}}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial y_{1}}\frac{\partial y_{1}}{\partial q_{j}}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial z_{1}}\frac{\partial z_{1}}{\partial q_{j}}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial x_{2}}\frac{\partial x_{2}}{\partial q_{j}}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial y_{1}}\frac{\partial y_{2}}{\partial q_{j}}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial z_{2}}\frac{\partial z_{2}}{\partial q_{j}}$$

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, I didn't think clearly about $V$ being a 6-variable function. $\endgroup$ – alfba Apr 16 '19 at 15:19

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.