3

I'm looking for a closed equation like $x=f(t)$ (if there is) for a simplified case of the two bodies problem:

Suppose that we have two point-like objects with the same mass, nothing more than their own gravity is effected on them. The initial distance between them is $D$. As the gravity force acts on them, they slowly speed up, reaching each other (let's say that they cannot collide), then begin to move away from each other. The following facts can be considered:

  1. They and their velocity vector are always in a line with their mutual barycenter point.
  2. The barycenter is always exactly halfway between them.
  3. The force and the acceleration is increasing to infinity until they reach each other at the barycenter.
  4. The total energy of the system is constant, the given potential energy transforms to kinetic energy, and vice versa.
  5. The maximum speed is not infinite, can be calculated easily.
  6. If there is an $x=f(t)$ function, then $f$ is a periodic function. If $x$ represents the current distance between the two objects, then $0\le x\le D$

Please help me to find the correct formula to calculate the distance $(x)$ in function of time. If there is no closed-form expression for this, then please suggest another simple way to calculate it. Thank you!

S Sabo
  • 31
  • Are you thinking that they will collide and bounce, or that they will miss each other? – Emilio Pisanty Mar 06 '14 at 12:49
  • In case of same mass point-like objects the result will be the same, doesn't matter if they collide elastically, I think. – S Sabo Mar 06 '14 at 14:15
  • That's not quite what I meant. Are you thinking of a 1D geometry where they approach head-on, or of a 2D setup where they have some nonzero impact parameter? The 1D example is analytically solvable but the 2D one requires the use of elliptical functions. – Emilio Pisanty Mar 06 '14 at 14:26
  • I mean a completely 1D case, where everything is in a line. I'd love to see that analytically solved expression that you mention, thank you in advance. – S Sabo Mar 06 '14 at 14:38
  • My bad, it's not completely solvable, but it's definitely better than the 2D solution. See my answer below. – Emilio Pisanty Mar 06 '14 at 15:53

3 Answers3

1

In a 1D geometry the problem is mostly analytically solvable. Start with the total energy of the system, $$ \frac12\mu\dot x^2-\frac kx=E, $$ where $E$ is the total energy, $k$ is the interaction constant, $\mu$ is the reduced mass, $x$ is the relative separation, and the usual variable separation into centre-of-mass and relative coordinates has already been performed. By solving for the velocity, $$ \frac{\text dx}{\text dt}=\pm\sqrt{\frac{2}{\mu}\left(E+\frac kx\right)},\tag1 $$ dividing by the right-hand side and integrating, $$ \pm\int_{x_0}^x\frac{\text dx}{\sqrt{\frac{2}{\mu}\left(E+\frac kx\right)}}=\int_{t_0}^t\text dt, $$ you can obtain a relation between the time $t$ and the position $x$ at that time: $$ \pm\sqrt{\frac{2}{\mu}}(t-t_0)=\frac{\sqrt{x(Ex+k)}}{E}-\frac{\sqrt{x_0(Ex_0+k)}}{E}-\frac{k}{E^{3/2}}\ln\left(\frac{E\sqrt{x}+\sqrt{E(k+Ex)}}{E\sqrt{x_0}+\sqrt{E(k+Ex_0)}}\right). $$

Unfortunately, that's as far as analytics go, and this relation cannot be inverted to give $x$ as a function of $t$ as you requested. However, this is enough to make any plot, table or calculation you may want to make quite easy to do.

From the points you list, 1-4 are indeed correct. However, point 5 is not: at the collision time at $x=0$, the velocity in (1) is indeed infinite. Whether the trajectory is periodic or not depends on what you do at the collision point; the equations so far cannot say what happens after that.

However, you can prove that they do meet at a finite time, and provide a closed expression for this. Assuming they start at a distance $D$ at time $t_0=0$ and start approaching, the result becomes $$ -\sqrt{\frac{2}{\mu}}t=\frac{\sqrt{x(Ex+k)}}{E}-\frac{\sqrt{D(ED+k)}}{E}-\frac{k}{E^{3/2}}\ln\left(\frac{E\sqrt{x}+\sqrt{E(k+Ex)}}{E\sqrt{D}+\sqrt{E(k+ED)}}\right). $$ At the collision time $t=T$, $x$ will be zero, which means that $$ T=\int_0^T\text dt=\sqrt{\frac{\mu}{2}}\int_0^D\frac{\text dx}{\sqrt{E+\frac kx}} =\sqrt{\frac{\mu}{2}\frac{D}{k}}\int_0^D\frac{\sqrt{x}}{\sqrt{D-x}}\text dx , $$ since $E=-k/D$. This integrates easily, using the substitution $x=D\sin^2(\theta)$, to $$ T=\sqrt{\frac{\mu}{8k}}\pi D^{3/2}, $$ which is fully consistent with Kepler's third law. This time $T$ can be one half of the motion's period, in the case where they bounce back elastically, or one-quarter of the period, in the case where they miss each other by an infinitesimal amount (or simply go past each other without a collision) and continue on the other side. This is essentially all that you can get out of the problem.

Emilio Pisanty
  • 132,859
  • 33
  • 351
  • 666
  • Thank you Emilio, I'm a little disappointed to hear that there is no closed formula, but I think that your answer will help me; I need some time to get through your answer. Until that can you please tell me how can it be that you state that the velocity is infinite at x=0, but the calculation is based on the total energy, which would be infinite in this case too? – S Sabo Mar 06 '14 at 16:19
  • That's simple: potential energy is infinite and negative. You will get similar behaviour whenever you have a potential that's not bounded from below. – Emilio Pisanty Mar 06 '14 at 16:21
  • Also note that you can upvote and accept answers that you've found useful. – Emilio Pisanty Mar 06 '14 at 16:25
0

Assuming the force is inverse square law, you could solve a non-linear differential equation of the form

$$m\ddot x + Kx^{-2} = 0$$

For some guidance, see this question and answer at our sister mathematics site. Also, see this Wikipedia section on one-dimensional central force problem.

  • I know that it is my fault, but I'm not so smart in mathematics to solve these differential equations and translate them to normal closed expression. Is it possible at all? I tried to read the linked sources, but I haven't found the formula. Could you please help me and select out the essential part? Thank you. – S Sabo Mar 06 '14 at 14:22
  • @SSabo, if all you're after is the periodic solution, see this Wikipedia section: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radial_trajectory#Elliptic_trajectory – Alfred Centauri Mar 06 '14 at 14:49
0

There is no explicit solution for the position as a function of time. Here are a three related questions: 1, 2 and 3.
This path is basically a Kepler orbit with zero angular momentum. This means that the eccentricity is equal to one and the semi-major axis is your case equal to $\frac{D}{2}$.

From such an orbit you can find an expression for the velocity and other higher derivatives of the position as a function of position.

For example is your case the velocity would be: $$ v(x)=\sqrt{\frac{\mu\left(2a-x\right)}{ax}} $$ where $a$ is the semi-major axis and $\mu$ the effective gravitational parameter.

The effective gravitational parameter would in this case be equal to: $\mu=\frac{Gm}{4}$, where $G$ is gravitational constant and $m$ the mass of each object.

However the velocity will tend to go to infinity when the position/distance goes to zero, so your 6th point will not be satisfied.

fibonatic
  • 5,876
  • I believe you that there is no explicit solution for the position as a function of time, but I can hardly imagine why. If I thinking on the fact, that the object is moving always in a non-infinite speed, then it must be clearly connected to the time as parameter. How can it be that there is no simple formula for this simple situation? If there is no closed expression, then can you help me to find an iterative formula (or similar) for it? Thank you. – S Sabo Mar 06 '14 at 14:34
  • It happens to be that the solution can not be constructed from a finite therms of known functions, such as polynomials and trigonometric functions. However you would be able to approximate it with these therms, but you would need infinitely many therms to have no errors. However these functions occur more often, so people came up with a function which describes it, so called Bessel functions. – fibonatic Mar 06 '14 at 21:02