solving a system of 2nd order differential equations with 3 variables
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I'm creating a simulator for spacecraft that models orbital mechanics. It's simple enough to find the magnitude and direction of gravitational force, but I want to be able to time accelerate without losing accuracy like in Kerbal Space Program, so I need direct functions of time rather than calculating frame-by-frame.
So, ultimately, I need to solve this system:
$$
frac{mathrm{d}^2x}{mathrm{d}t^2}=-frac{Gmx}{(x^2+y^2)^frac{3}{2}}
$$
$$
frac{mathrm{d}^2y}{mathrm{d}t^2}=-frac{Gmy}{(x^2+y^2)^frac{3}{2}}
$$
where $G$ and $m$ are constants.
From these two equations, I need to find x and y as functions of t (there will obviously be some initial values to plug in). I've taken multivariable calc and diff eq., but I don't remember having done anything quite like this. Any suggestions on how to approach this, or equations of this form in general, for that matter? I could do this easily if it was only one dimension.
And maybe there's an better way to do this that uses conics instead of calculus, but that's more of a programming question.
It has been half a year since I've had a calculus course, so it is quite possible I've forgotten something. I have been unable to find any help on the internet, however, though I know I'm not the first one to do this.
differential-equations multivariable-calculus systems-of-equations physics
asked Nov 26 at 1:33
Nathanael Vetters
111
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I'm creating a simulator for spacecraft that models orbital mechanics. It's simple enough to find the magnitude and direction of gravitational force, but I want to be able to time accelerate without losing accuracy like in Kerbal Space Program, so I need direct functions of time rather than calculating frame-by-frame.
So, ultimately, I need to solve this system:
$$
frac{mathrm{d}^2x}{mathrm{d}t^2}=-frac{Gmx}{(x^2+y^2)^frac{3}{2}}
$$
$$
frac{mathrm{d}^2y}{mathrm{d}t^2}=-frac{Gmy}{(x^2+y^2)^frac{3}{2}}
$$
where $G$ and $m$ are constants.
From these two equations, I need to find x and y as functions of t (there will obviously be some initial values to plug in). I've taken multivariable calc and diff eq., but I don't remember having done anything quite like this. Any suggestions on how to approach this, or equations of this form in general, for that matter? I could do this easily if it was only one dimension.
And maybe there's an better way to do this that uses conics instead of calculus, but that's more of a programming question.
It has been half a year since I've had a calculus course, so it is quite possible I've forgotten something. I have been unable to find any help on the internet, however, though I know I'm not the first one to do this.
differential-equations multivariable-calculus systems-of-equations physics
asked Nov 26 at 1:33
Nathanael Vetters
111
1
It's common to use Verlet integration or another symplectic integrator for Newton's equations.
– K B Dave
Nov 26 at 1:47
This problem can be better solved in polar coordinates. You can easily see that the angular momentum is conserved, so all you need to solve is the radial equation.
– Andrei
Nov 29 at 18:33
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I'm creating a simulator for spacecraft that models orbital mechanics. It's simple enough to find the magnitude and direction of gravitational force, but I want to be able to time accelerate without losing accuracy like in Kerbal Space Program, so I need direct functions of time rather than calculating frame-by-frame.
So, ultimately, I need to solve this system:
$$
frac{mathrm{d}^2x}{mathrm{d}t^2}=-frac{Gmx}{(x^2+y^2)^frac{3}{2}}
$$
$$
frac{mathrm{d}^2y}{mathrm{d}t^2}=-frac{Gmy}{(x^2+y^2)^frac{3}{2}}
$$
where $G$ and $m$ are constants.
From these two equations, I need to find x and y as functions of t (there will obviously be some initial values to plug in). I've taken multivariable calc and diff eq., but I don't remember having done anything quite like this. Any suggestions on how to approach this, or equations of this form in general, for that matter? I could do this easily if it was only one dimension.
And maybe there's an better way to do this that uses conics instead of calculus, but that's more of a programming question.
It has been half a year since I've had a calculus course, so it is quite possible I've forgotten something. I have been unable to find any help on the internet, however, though I know I'm not the first one to do this.
differential-equations multivariable-calculus systems-of-equations physics
asked Nov 26 at 1:33
Nathanael Vetters
111
I'm creating a simulator for spacecraft that models orbital mechanics. It's simple enough to find the magnitude and direction of gravitational force, but I want to be able to time accelerate without losing accuracy like in Kerbal Space Program, so I need direct functions of time rather than calculating frame-by-frame.
So, ultimately, I need to solve this system:
$$
frac{mathrm{d}^2x}{mathrm{d}t^2}=-frac{Gmx}{(x^2+y^2)^frac{3}{2}}
$$
$$
frac{mathrm{d}^2y}{mathrm{d}t^2}=-frac{Gmy}{(x^2+y^2)^frac{3}{2}}
$$
where $G$ and $m$ are constants.
From these two equations, I need to find x and y as functions of t (there will obviously be some initial values to plug in). I've taken multivariable calc and diff eq., but I don't remember having done anything quite like this. Any suggestions on how to approach this, or equations of this form in general, for that matter? I could do this easily if it was only one dimension.
And maybe there's an better way to do this that uses conics instead of calculus, but that's more of a programming question.
It has been half a year since I've had a calculus course, so it is quite possible I've forgotten something. I have been unable to find any help on the internet, however, though I know I'm not the first one to do this.
differential-equations multivariable-calculus systems-of-equations physics
differential-equations multivariable-calculus systems-of-equations physics
asked Nov 26 at 1:33
Nathanael Vetters
111
asked Nov 26 at 1:33
Nathanael Vetters
111
asked Nov 26 at 1:33
Nathanael Vetters
111
asked Nov 26 at 1:33
Nathanael Vetters
111
asked Nov 26 at 1:33
Nathanael Vetters
111
111
1
It's common to use Verlet integration or another symplectic integrator for Newton's equations.
– K B Dave
Nov 26 at 1:47
This problem can be better solved in polar coordinates. You can easily see that the angular momentum is conserved, so all you need to solve is the radial equation.
– Andrei
Nov 29 at 18:33
add a comment |
1
It's common to use Verlet integration or another symplectic integrator for Newton's equations.
– K B Dave
Nov 26 at 1:47
This problem can be better solved in polar coordinates. You can easily see that the angular momentum is conserved, so all you need to solve is the radial equation.
– Andrei
Nov 29 at 18:33
1
1
It's common to use Verlet integration or another symplectic integrator for Newton's equations.
– K B Dave
Nov 26 at 1:47
It's common to use Verlet integration or another symplectic integrator for Newton's equations.
– K B Dave
Nov 26 at 1:47
This problem can be better solved in polar coordinates. You can easily see that the angular momentum is conserved, so all you need to solve is the radial equation.
– Andrei
Nov 29 at 18:33
This problem can be better solved in polar coordinates. You can easily see that the angular momentum is conserved, so all you need to solve is the radial equation.
– Andrei
Nov 29 at 18:33
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3013684%2fsolving-a-system-of-2nd-order-differential-equations-with-3-variables%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
It's common to use Verlet integration or another symplectic integrator for Newton's equations.
– K B Dave
Nov 26 at 1:47
This problem can be better solved in polar coordinates. You can easily see that the angular momentum is conserved, so all you need to solve is the radial equation.
– Andrei
Nov 29 at 18:33