1
$\begingroup$

Imagine there is a mechanical system described in unitary units by the equation: $$\dot{x} = -\text{sgn}(x)\sqrt{|x|},\quad x(0)=1 \tag{Eq. 1}$$ such it has a finite duration solution: $$x(t) = \frac{1}{4}\left(1-\frac{t}{2}+\left|1-\frac{t}{2}\right|\right)^2 \tag{Eq. 2}$$

Is this enough information to reconstruct its Kinetic and Potential Energies to obtain its Lagrangian of this System and its Least Action Principle's integral? What are these values in terms of $x(t)$?

Motivation

Recently I have learned about the existence of finite duration solutions of differential equations on these papers: Finite Time Differential Equations and Finite Time Controllers by Vardia T. Haimo, and since everyday phenomena are of finite duration, I want to know how will behave the Energy and the Least Action Principle on this kind of system with finite duration solutions, and this is the only example I have so far of an autonomous system that stands finite duration solutions (maybe $\dot{y} = -\sqrt{y},\,y(0)=1$ also works if the solutions is restrained to the reals, since after $(y,\,\dot{y})=(0,\,0)$ the derivative is never going to rise up again since the square root is positive).

I am trying to make a mechanical system with $x(t)$ the solution to their equation of motions, not in the other way.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Mechanical system is described by second order differential equation $\endgroup$
    – Eli
    Mar 27 at 7:41
  • $\begingroup$ @Eli I left the explicit solution $x(t)$: It is not possible to obtain the equations of motion by differentiated it twice? $\endgroup$
    – Joako
    Mar 28 at 19:32
  • $\begingroup$ the equations of motion are described by the Newton second law. $\endgroup$
    – Eli
    Mar 28 at 20:40

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$
  1. A 1st-order ODE $$\dot{x}~=~f(x,t)\tag{A}$$ cannot be a Euler-Lagrange (EL) equation if we are only allowed to use a single real variable $x(t)$, cf. e.g. this Math.SE post.

  2. With several variables it is easy. We can e.g. use a Lagrange multiplier $$ S[x,\lambda]~=~ \int_{t_i}^{t_f}\!dt~ \lambda(\dot{x}-f(x,t)) \tag{B}$$

  3. Care should be taken wrt. boundary conditions, so that they are compatible with the physical system at hand, i.e. one might need to add boundary terms to the action (B).

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for answering. Since the explicit solution is given, I was expecting to form the kinetic energy as $K=\frac{1}{2}\dot{x}$ ($m=1$, and $\dot{x}$ from the equation), use a generic potential $V$ and since the $\int\,K - V\,dt$ should give the same equation for $\dot{x}$ one could determine $V$ (again, this because I know the explicit solution of $x(t)$). If this approach is mistaken, It could be possible to obtain the equation of motion from the Work-Energy Theorem? (since I have the initial Kinetic energy, and the final Kinetic Energy is zero - the solution $x(t)$ is of finite-duration) $\endgroup$
    – Joako
    Mar 28 at 19:25
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Hi Joako, For starters, your proposed kinetic term $K=\frac{1}{2}\dot{x}$ is a total time derivative, and hence does not contribute to the EL equation. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic
    Mar 28 at 19:47
  • $\begingroup$ Let me see If I am following you: From mechanics principles (like Newton´s laws, Lagrangian/Hamiltonian, others) it is possible to obtain the equations of motion, but from the equation of motion, is not always possible to reconstruct these principle's equations back? $\endgroup$
    – Joako
    Mar 28 at 20:01
  • $\begingroup$ Forget variational principles for a moment. How did you/Can you derive eq. (1) from Newton's laws? $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic
    Mar 28 at 20:08
  • $\begingroup$ Don´t really know... I am trying to form a mechanical system that can stand a solution of finite duration from the only example with explicit solution I know, so I am working backwards.... an alternative idea could be differentiating one time the equation $\dot{y} = -\sqrt{y}$ which also stand the same solution (since is also non Lipschitz at zero)... the second derivative will be the $F\cdot a$ term and the other side a potential, something similar to the Norton's Dome but with convergent instead of divergent solutions. $\endgroup$
    – Joako
    Mar 28 at 20:16

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.