It might be just a simple definition problem but I learned in class that a central force does not necessarily need to be conservative and the German Wikipedia says so too. However, the English Wikipedia states different on their articles for example:
A central force is a conservative field, that is, it can always be expressed as the negative gradient of a potential
They use the argument that each central force can be expressed as a gradient of a (radial symmetric) potential. And since forces that are gradient fields are per definition conservative forces, central forces must be conservative. As far as I understand, a central force can have a (radial symmetric) potential but this is not necessarily always the case.
Update Sep 2017: The english Wikipedia has updated its text and now explicitly states
Not all central force fields are conservative nor spherically symmetric. However, it can be shown that a central force is conservative if and only if it is spherically symmetric.[2]
Answer
Depends on what you mean by 'central force'.
If your central force is of the form →F=f(r)ˆr (the force points radially inward/outward and its magnitude depends only on the distance from the center), then it is easy to show that ϕ=−∫drf(r) is a potential field for the force and generates the force. This is usually what I see people mean when they say "central force."
If, however, you just mean that the force points radially inward/outward, but can depend on the other coordinates, then you have →F=f(r,θ,ϕ)ˆr, and you're going to run into problems finding the potential, because you need f=−∂V∂r, but you will also need to have ∂V∂θ=∂V∂ϕ=0 to kill the non-radial components, and this will lead to contradictions.
It's logical that a field of this form is gong to be nonconservative, because if the force is greater at θ=0 than it is at θ=π/2, then you can do net work around a closed curve by moving outward from r1 to r2 at θ=0 (positive work), then staying at r2 constant, going from θ=0 to θ=π/2 (zero work--radial force), going back to r1 (less work than the first step), and returning to θ=0 (zero work).
No comments:
Post a Comment