1

This question was suggested to be placed in the math forum. 3 particles are at the corners of an equilateral triangle with side $a$. Assume that particle 1 is at $(0,0)$, particle 2 is at $(a,0)$ and particle 3 is at $(a/2, a\sqrt 3/2)$. They all start moving simultaneously with a velocity $v$ constant in modulus, but with the first particle heading towards the second one, the second towards the third, and the third towards the first particle.

The typical question is how soon will they meet? I can easily answer this question with symmetry and relative speed considerations (they meet at the centroid after a time $2a/3v$). My question is a bit more complicated.

  • Can we solve this without invoking symmetry, but purely mathematically?
  • Second, can we describe the velocity vector of particle 1 as a function of time $t$ assuming it started at the origin?
  • Third, can we describe the trajectory of particle 1 as a curve mathematically?
Paul Sinclair
  • 45,932
R P
  • 21
  • Log spiral solution known, a differential equation to be set up for this or for square.Small typo , $a$ missing. – Narasimham Feb 06 '16 at 01:29
  • Hi @Narasimham, could you explain your answer in more detail? I'm interested in the setting up this problem correctly so I can apply to non-symmetrical systems as well. – R P Feb 06 '16 at 01:32
  • Also, can we set this up purely with vectors and calculus? – R P Feb 06 '16 at 01:34
  • Take the projection of the velocity toward the center - it is fixed. You know the distance to the center. I do not see how symmetry helps - it is not physical. There are solutions to your other two questions. – Moti Feb 06 '16 at 05:45
  • @Moti - the particles are gravitationally attracted, and their initial velocity is not perpendicular to the direction of the c.g., so their orbits will not be circular. I.e., the central component of the velocity is not fixed. And I can't even figure out what you would mean by saying symmetry "is not physical". It is obviously physical. Symmetry is a mainstay of physics and greatly simplifies the solving of problems. – Paul Sinclair Feb 06 '16 at 07:02
  • Looking it over again, I assumed that gravity was involved from the term "3 body problem" in the title. The three body problem is the name given to determining the action of 3 bodies with mass under gravitational attraction - particularly Newtonian. But I see no mention of gravity in the problem itself, so I am wondering if this is correct. @RP, do you mean these bodies to be acting under each other's gravity? – Paul Sinclair Feb 06 '16 at 07:08
  • If this gravity, than based on symmetry(?) and simple physics the attraction of both other particles result a force of each particle to the center. If you talk about a Puzzle - pairs attraction and fixed speed (similar to the 4 bugs puzzle) than you get a spiral like. Is acceleration involved? – Moti Feb 07 '16 at 16:28
  • @RP If v is fixed this is not gravitational force, and it is not gravitational since only "one" particle attracts a particle. There are way simpler solutions than the one provided. First or second year calculus could be used to solve the problem with accurate solution. If you will clarify your question - I will prepare the solution (with graphics). – Moti Feb 08 '16 at 16:03
  • @Moti : no, I'm not assuming any gravitational force. The speed (not velocity) is constant as mentioned. Also, as several people here pointed out, the provided coordinates for the particles' initial locations can be chosen to be more "symmetric". Any thoughts/ alternative solutions you can provide would be much appreciated. – R P Feb 09 '16 at 00:33
  • @RP What is the difference between Speed and Velocity? I assume they are the same - the derivative as function of time. Will work on my take. – Moti Feb 09 '16 at 06:30
  • Fun fact: you can pose the same problem as a gravitational 3-body problem. Release the particles with zero velocity and let them attract each other via the inverse square law. Since the equilateral triangle is a so-called central configuration the particles will collapse towards their center of mass just like in this problem. – Winther Feb 09 '16 at 20:26
  • Please limit your questions to one question per post. – amWhy Jul 06 '21 at 19:05

3 Answers3

2

It makes sense to arrange the three particles right from the start in a way that exhibits the symmetry of the problem. Therefore at time $t=0$ they are at $$R\>\omega^k\quad(0\leq k\leq2),\qquad R:={a\over\sqrt{ 3}},\quad \omega:=e^{2\pi i/3}\ .$$ The uniqueness part of the fundamental theorem about systems of ODEs implies that the three particles form an equilateral triangle centered at $0$ at all times. This means that for all $t$ and all $k$ (mod 3) we have $$z_k(t)=\omega^k\>z(t)$$ for a unique function $$t\mapsto z(t)=r(t)\>e^{i\phi(t)}\ .$$ (Note that the map $z\mapsto \omega\>z$ amounts to a rotation by $120^\circ$ around $0$.)

It remains to determine the function $t\mapsto z(t)$. The constituent equation $$\dot z_k={z_{k+1}-z_k \over| z_{k+1}-z_k|}\>v\qquad(0\leq k\leq2)$$ translates into $$(\dot r+ ir\dot\phi)e^{i\phi}={r e^{i\phi}(\omega-1)\over r|\omega-1|}\>v\ ,$$ so that we obtain $$\dot r+i r\dot\phi =\left(-{\sqrt{3}\over2}+{i\over2}\right)v\ .\tag{1}$$ It follows that $$r(t)=R-{\sqrt{3}\over2}v \>t\qquad(0\leq t\leq T)$$ with $T={2a\over3v}$. I leave it to you to determine the function $t\mapsto\phi(t)$ by looking at the imaginary part of $(1)$. The resulting three curves are logarithmic spirals.

  • thanks! This looks promising, I'll follow the math in more detail and verify. – R P Feb 06 '16 at 13:10
  • @Christian can you please clarify/explain this step $$z_k(t)=\omega^k>z(t)\qquad(0\leq k\leq2)$$ and The next step a little bit...? I understand that they form a triangle at all times and how you are manipulating complex numbers... But theese two steps are a bit confusing. – Freelancer Feb 06 '16 at 17:38
  • @Freelancer: Multiplication by $\omega$ amounts to a $120^\circ$ rotation around the origin. The constituent equation expresses that $\dot z_k$ is in direction $z_{k+1}-z_k$ and has absolute value the given $v$. – Christian Blatter Feb 09 '16 at 09:05
  • nice..........+1 – Bhaskara-III Feb 09 '16 at 19:40
  • For this problem the suggested solution is an "overkill":) – Moti Feb 09 '16 at 21:20
1

Starting with the origin at one of the particles just makes the problem harder for no good reason. You pick up extra terms that have to be dealt with. Much easier to put it at the center of the triangle. Once you have that solution, it is simple to move it to one of points, if you really feel you must.

Let $p_1, p_2, p_3$ be the position vectors of the three particles. At time $t = 0$, we then have $$\|p_1\| = \|p_2\| = \|p_3\| = \frac a{\sqrt 3}$$ Also at $t = 0$, $$\|p_2 - p_1\| = \|p_3 - p_2\| = \|p_1 - p_3\| = a$$ From this, you can easily deduce that $$p_1\cdot p_2 = p_2\cdot p_3 = p_3\cdot p_1 = -\frac{a^2}6$$

Now, the initial velocity condition can be expressed as $$\dot p_1(0) = b(p_2(0) - p_1(0))\\\dot p_2(0) = b(p_3(0) - p_2(0))\\\dot p_3(0) = b(p_1(0) - p_3(0))$$ for some constant $b$. And the gravitational attraction can be expressed as $$\ddot p_1 = c\frac{p_2 - p_1}{\|p_2 - p_1\|^3} + c\frac{p_3 - p_1}{\|p_3 - p_1\|^3}$$ $$\ddot p_2 = c\frac{p_1 - p_2}{\|p_1 - p_2\|^3} + c\frac{p_3 - p_2}{\|p_3 - p_2\|^3}$$ $$\ddot p_3 = c\frac{p_1 - p_3}{\|p_1 - p_3\|^3} + c\frac{p_2 - p_3}{\|p_2 - p_3\|^3}$$

for some constant $c$. Define $p = p_1 + p_2 + p_3$. Because the origin is in the center of the triangle, $p(0) = 0$. Also $$\dot p(0)= \dot p_1(0) + \dot p_2(0) +\dot p_3(0) = 0$$ and $$\ddot p= \ddot p_1 + \ddot p_2 +\ddot p_3 = 0$$

Therefore $p = 0$ for all $t$.

You can continue in this vane to solve the entire system. By choosing expressions that are symmetric in their use of $p_1, p_2, p_3$, you can show that they behave simply, then use this information to deduce $p_1, p_2, p_3$ themselves. If I have time, I may take it farther.

Paul Sinclair
  • 45,932
  • "the gravitational attraction can be expressed...." are you assuming that they start moving because of their mutual gravitational attraction ...?...or I am missing something... – Freelancer Feb 06 '16 at 07:42
  • I see that you or I have some confusion regarding this as you have mentioned in your earlier comments ...well I think that they are not moving because of gravitational force... – Freelancer Feb 06 '16 at 07:46
  • Because the question says initially the particles were placed ...at the corners and then they simultaneously start moving ....with a constant velocity...which indicates this is not because of gravitational force !!...as if it was the case ...then after making the free-body diagram it is very clear that the particles should have been accelerating ...instead of moving with constant velocities....as the question says...so I don't think ...this assumption of yours is valid... – Freelancer Feb 06 '16 at 07:51
  • @Paul Sinclair, Freelancer is right. The problem never stated that there was a gravitational attraction. The reason for the particles' peculiar motion may be unknown. But, we are simply required to describe it. – R P Feb 06 '16 at 13:03
  • @RP - then I suggest a change to the title, as the "3-body problem" is about masses acting under the influence of gravity. – Paul Sinclair Feb 06 '16 at 16:16
  • @Freelancer - although RP has indicated your interpretation is the intended one, let me address your comments: How the particles got where they are is immaterial to the problem. The wording merely tells the initial conditions: 3 particles of equal mass symmetrically placed. Since he said they start moving with constant speed, I took this to mean an initial condition only, "constant" meaning that all three had the same initial speed. And that the directions were just for the initial velocity. I mistook this for an actual physics problem, not a math problem dressed in physics language. – Paul Sinclair Feb 06 '16 at 16:26
  • @Paul sinclair ....Well...this question was initially posted on physics stackexchange ....so you were pretty close..!!...but since the question has been addressed by Christian ...so even if I assumethat the question you mistook this for was the actual question....then is there any other method of solving this question(ones answer which you were trying to give)...because your solution ...still looks really long to me... – Freelancer Feb 06 '16 at 17:24
  • @Freelancer - Should have been a tip-off when they quite correctly moved it here. I was trying to address his request for how to solve it "mathematically" without invoking symmetry. This I took to mean physical/geometric symmetry, as opposed to algebraic symmetry (symmetry in the treatment of the variables) which I did invoke. I wanted to show how the physical symmetry follows from the algebraic symmetry. Otherwise I would have followed a similar approach as Christian's from the start (though for my gravitational problem). – Paul Sinclair Feb 06 '16 at 17:43
0

Here is my take: Particles at A, B and C. O the center of the triangle. A move to B, B to C, and C to A, with a constant velocity $v$. $v_t$ the tangent component and $v_r$ the radial component.

$\frac{dR}{dt}=-v_r$ and $\frac{d\theta}{dt}=\frac{v_t}{R}$ from this $\frac{d\theta}{dR}$ may be determined and solved for $R=f(\theta)$

can you take it from here? If not will get the solution for you.

enter image description here

Moti
  • 2,011
  • How would you determine the integral limit when the particles meet? – R P Feb 10 '16 at 01:13
  • You get the function without the need to have the limits of the integral, but you could calculate for $\theta$ going from 0 to infinity. You could get the time from R/$v_r$ – Moti Feb 10 '16 at 07:02
  • Don't you like this solution that does not rely on the symmetry? – Moti Feb 10 '16 at 07:05
  • this method doesn't seem to work. Or, I'm unable to follow your method correctly. The horizontal component or what you call vt will always be at 60 deg to the direction of v at any instant. Also, initially the particles are separated at distance R =a/sqrt(3) and finally at distance 0. The integral on R is of a log form and will result in indeterminate number when the limit is taken from R to zero. On the other hand, the theta always remains a constant. So, something is wrong with this idea. – R P Feb 10 '16 at 20:48
  • All the triangle is rotating and $\theta$ is accordingly increasing. R is the distance of the particles to the center, and is decreasing with time. Divide the first derivative by the second and you get the derivative of R in relation to $\theta$. Get R as function of $\theta$. The initial value of R $R_0$ divided by $v_r$ is the time to collision. Yes, the two components of the velocity that changes direction with time is in constant angle to that direction and the center - as you successfully recovered:) – Moti Feb 11 '16 at 20:56