DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, MADRAS

PH101 Physics I Problem Set 6 – Solutions 18.10.2002

1(a). The required plot is given below. The dotted line is the best fit straight
line and the exponent is clearly 3/2 as expected from Kepler’s Third Law.
1e+10

1e+09
T

1e+08

1e+07 best fit

7
T=3.16 x 10 a 1.5

1e+06
0.1 1 10 100
a
Verifying Kepler’s Third Law for planets

1(b). Let TE (TM ) and aE (aM ) be the time period and semi-major axis for the
earth’s (moon’s) orbit. Kepler’s Third Law gives us the relations

TE2 4π 2 TM2
4π 2
= , = ,
a3E GMsun a3M GMearth

where G is gravitational constant. Using this we get,

2
TM Msun a3M
= .
TE2 Mearth a3E

On using Msun /Mearth ∼ 3.3 × 105 and aM /aE = 2.58 × 10−3 , we obtain

TM = (3.3 × 2.58)0.5 × 2.58 × 3.65 = 27.48 days ,

which is correct to half a percent.

1
 ~ = L êz , θ = π/2 and θ̇ = 0.
2(a). We can assume with no loss of generality that L
Thus, the particle is moving in the xy-plane and we can replace êr by êρ .
~
We need to show that dA/dt = 0 in order to show that it is a constant of
~ ·L
motion. Before that, notice that A ~ ≡ 0 implying that A ~ is a vector lying
in the plane of the orbit.
It suffices to show the vanishing of the following time derivative to prove
the constancy of A.~
 
d h ~
i dêr ~ d~p dêr ~ k
mk êr + L × p~ = mk +L× = mk −L× êr , (1)
dt dt dt dt r2
where we have used Newton’s Second Law to obtain the last term. Now, in
the xy-plane
dêr ∂êr ∂êr L
= ϕ̇ + θ̇ = êϕ ϕ̇ = êϕ .
dt ∂ϕ ∂θ mr2
Substituting the above result in Eq. (1), we obtain (on specialising to the
xy-plane)
d h ~ × p~ = kL [êϕ − (êz × êρ )] = 0
i
mk êr + L
dt r2
Thus, A~ is a constant of motion.
Geometric Interpretation Since A ~ is a constant of motion, its value can
be evaluated at any instant of time. We choose the instant when the particle
is closest to the center of attraction. At this instant, ṙ = 0 and r = rmin .
This implies that
2
L ~ × p~ = − L êr .
p~ = mrmin ϕ̇ = êϕ ⇒ L
rmin rmin
One can thus see that A ~ ∝ êr i.e., it is a constant vector whose direction
is along the vector joining the center of attraction to the point of closest
approach. The constancy of the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector implies that
the orbit does not precess. For instance, suppose we add a term c/r2 (c
is a “small positive constant”) to the gravitational potential, then A ~ is no
longer a constant vector and the orbit will precess, i.e., the point of closest
approach will slowly move.
2(b). The time-average of a quantity O is related to the angular-average of an-
other quantity.
1 T 1 T dt
Z Z
2πm 2
hOit ≡ dt O = dϕ O = hr Oiϕ ,
T 0 T 0 dϕ LT
where we have used L = mr2 ϕ̇ to obtain the last equality above. For an
elliptical orbit, one has
r0
= (1 +  cos ϕ) ,
r

2
 where 2 = 2Ẽ + 1 = 2(E/U0 ) + 1. Using the expression for r0 , one can
see that the above relation between the time and angular averages can be
rewritten as
(1 − 2 )3/2 2
hOit = hr Oiϕ .
r02
We need to evaluate the angular and time average of r. Let us first evaluate
the angular-average: 1
Z 2π
1 dϕ r0
hriϕ = r0 =p .
2π 0 (1 +  cos ϕ) (1 − 2 )

The time average of r is obtained by converting into an angular-average as

shown above:
Z 2π
(1 − 2 )3/2 3 2 3/2 1 dϕ 1 + (2 /2)
hrit = hr iϕ = r 0 (1− ) = r 0 .
r02 2π 0 (1 +  cos ϕ)3 1 − 2

Note: The two averages hrit and hriϕ are not equal except when  = 0
which is the case when the ellipse becomes a circle.

2(c). Since E is a constant of motion one has hEit = hEiϕ = E. Let T and U
denote the kinetic and potential energy of the particle. One has

hT it + hU it = E ⇒ hT it = E − hU it .

It thus sufficient to compute hU it . One obtains

(1 − 2 )3/2
 
1
hU it = −k = −k 2
hriϕ = −U0 (1 − 2 ) = 2E
r t r0

(Note: E = U0 (1 − 2 )/2.)
Thus, one has hT it = E − hU it = −E. Thus, the ratio of the time average
of T and U is −1/2. This is called virial theorem.

Z 2π
1 1 dϕ
Let In ≡ p . One can show that I1 = 1/(1 − 2 )1/2 , I2 = 1/(1 − 2 )3/2 ,
2π 0 (1 − 2 )n
I3 = (1 + (2 /2))/(1 − 2 )5/2 , . . .

3
3. Consider the motion of a particle of mass m in the potential
U (r) = C rn , (2)
where n is a non-zero integer (positive or negative). C is a constant of ap-
propriate physical dimensions (energy divided by the nth power of length).
The Coulomb potential corresponds to the case n = −1 , while the three-
dimensional harmonic oscillator corresponds to n = 2 . We now show that
there is a simple scaling relationship between the natural length and time
scales for motion in such a power law potential for any n . Kepler’s Third
Law is recovered when n is set equal to −1 .
The natural mass scale in the problem is again just m . The identification
of the natural length scale is based on the same physical considerations as
in the Kepler problem. The pure power law form of the potential implies
that there is no intrinsic length scale associated with U (r) itself:
the potential energy simply increases monotonically as r increases from 0 to
∞ . (When n is positive, U (r) increases from 0 to ∞ ; when n is negative,
it increases from −∞ to 0 .) However, when the effect of the repulsive
centrifugal barrier is taken into account, we have an effective potential
L2
Ueff (r) = + C rn (3)
2mr2
that does have some “structure”, in the sense that it has a unique mini-
mum at some value of r. This minimum value provides the natural length
scale for the problem. We find
 2 1/(n+2)
L
r0 = . (4)
m|C|
As already mentioned, the exact numerical factor in the definition of any
natural scale is not important. The natural energy scale in the problem is
again provided by the magnitude of the potential energy at r = r0 , and is
U0 = |C| r0n . Therefore the natural time scale t0 in the problem is obtained
by setting U0 equal to m r02 t−2
0 . This immediately yields

t20 = k r0n−2 , (5)

where k is a constant that depends on m and |C| but not on the specific
initial conditions of the motion. The implications of such a relationship have
already been explained in the special case n = −1 (the Kepler problem).
Exactly the same conclusions hold good here for a general value of n. Any
motion in a power-law central potential (a potential ∝ rn ) with a
characteristic time T and characteristic distance D is equivalent
to motion with corresponding quantities T 0 and D 0 , where
T2 T 02
= . (6)
Dn−2 D 0 n−2
4
The case n = 2 is particularly noteworthy. The RHS of Eq. (5) now
becomes independent of r0 . This means that the characteristic time of the
motion is independent of the initial conditions when n = 2 . But n = 2
corresponds to the three-dimensional isotropic harmonic oscillator,
since the potential energy in this case is k r2 = k (x2 + y 2 + z 2 ) . The term
“isotropic” refers to the fact that the potential is spherically symmetric, i.e.,
a central potential. The physical consequence of this isotropy is that the
oscillator has the same natural frequency for oscillations in all directions. In
this case Eq. (5) or (6) is just the statement that the time period of a simple
harmonic oscillator is independent of its amplitude! The constant k now
has the physical dimensions of M T −2 , without any power of L occurring
in it. Therefore (m/|C|)1/2 already provides a natural time scale that is
manifestly independent of the initial conditions (and hence of the energy,
angular momentum, etc.) of the oscillator.