Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
|
Re: Is Wilipedia right?
Posted:
Oct 25, 2012 8:10 PM
|
|
On Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:45:53 PM UTC-4, Dr J R Stockton wrote:
> Wikipedia page section
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrangian_point#History_and_concepts>
>
> currently contains (please read the page for context, if needed) :
>
>
>
> "Lagrange, however, wanted to make this simpler. He did so with a simple
>
> hypothesis: The trajectory of an object is determined by finding a path
>
> that minimizes the action over time. This is found by subtracting the
>
> potential energy from the kinetic energy. With this way of thinking,
>
> Lagrange re-formulated the classical Newtonian mechanics to give rise
>
> to Lagrangian mechanics."
>
>
>
> Lagrange's only writing relevant to the Points is in chapters 1 and 2 of
>
> <http://www.ltas-vis.ulg.ac.be/cmsms/uploads/File/Lagrange_essai_3corps.pdf>
>
> which is translated in <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/essai-3c.htm>.
>
>
>
> QUESTION : Is that Wikipedia paragraph correct, or is it wrong? GRANTED (I
>
> suppose) that Lagrange did find/use minimisation of action; but the question
>
> is whether he did so IN THAT WORK.
>
>
>
> I cannot see it myself; but it's a long time since I was taught such things.
>
> I is plutonium archimedis. please e-mail me at:
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
>
> --
>
> (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Mail via homepage. Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
>
> Web <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
>
> Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc..
|
|
|
|
