in a spin uses conservation of angular momentum – decreasing her
moment of inertia by drawing in her arms and legs increases her
rotational speed.
General considerations A rotational analog of
Newton's third law of motion might be written, "In an
isolated system, no torque can be exerted on any matter without the exertion on some other matter of an equal and opposite torque about the same axis." Seen another way, a rotational analogue of
Newton's first law of motion might be written, "A rigid body continues in a state of uniform rotation unless acted upon by an external influence." and in gradual increase of the radius of Moon's orbit, at about 3.82 centimeters per year. caused by the two opposing forces
Fg and −
Fg causes a change in the angular momentum
L in the direction of that torque (since torque is the time derivative of angular momentum). This causes the
top to
precess. The conservation of angular momentum explains the angular acceleration of an
ice skater as they bring their arms and legs close to the vertical axis of rotation. By bringing part of the mass of their body closer to the axis, they decrease their body's moment of inertia. Because angular momentum is the product of
moment of inertia and
angular velocity, if the angular momentum remains constant (is conserved), then the angular velocity (rotational speed) of the skater must increase. The same phenomenon results in extremely fast spin of compact stars (like
white dwarfs,
neutron stars and
black holes) when they are formed out of much larger and slower rotating stars. Conservation is not always a full explanation for the dynamics of a system but is a key constraint. For example, a
spinning top is subject to gravitational torque making it lean over and change the angular momentum about the
nutation axis, but neglecting friction at the point of spinning contact, it has a conserved angular momentum about its spinning axis, and another about its
precession axis. Also, in any
planetary system, the planets, star(s), comets, and asteroids can all move in numerous complicated ways, but only so that the angular momentum of the system is conserved.
Noether's theorem states that every
conservation law is associated with a
symmetry (invariant) of the underlying physics. The symmetry associated with conservation of angular momentum is
rotational invariance. The fact that the physics of a system is unchanged if it is rotated by any angle about an axis implies that angular momentum is conserved.
Relation to Newton's second law of motion While angular momentum total conservation can be understood separately from
Newton's laws of motion as stemming from
Noether's theorem in systems symmetric under rotations, it can also be understood simply as an efficient method of calculation of results that can also be otherwise arrived at directly from Newton's second law, together with laws governing the forces of nature (such as Newton's third law,
Maxwell's equations and
Lorentz force). Indeed, given initial conditions of position and velocity for every point, and the forces at such a condition, one may use Newton's second law to calculate the second derivative of position, and solving for this gives full information on the development of the physical system with time. Note, however, that this is no longer true in
quantum mechanics, due to the existence of
particle spin, which is an angular momentum that cannot be described by the cumulative effect of point-like motions in space. As an example, consider decreasing of the
moment of inertia, e.g. when a
figure skater is pulling in their hands, speeding up the circular motion. In terms of angular momentum conservation, we have, for angular momentum
L, moment of inertia
I and angular velocity
ω: 0 = dL = d (I\cdot \omega) = dI \cdot \omega + I \cdot d\omega Using this, we see that the change requires an energy of: dE = d \left(\tfrac{1}{2} I\cdot \omega^2\right) = \tfrac{1}{2} dI \cdot \omega^2 + I \cdot \omega \cdot d\omega = -\tfrac{1}{2} dI \cdot \omega^2 so that a decrease in the moment of inertia requires investing energy. This can be compared to the work done as calculated using Newton's laws. Each point in the rotating body is accelerating, at each point of time, with radial acceleration of: -r\cdot \omega^2 Let us observe a point of mass
m, whose position vector relative to the center of motion is perpendicular to the z-axis at a given point of time, and is at a distance
z. The
centripetal force on this point, keeping the circular motion, is: -m\cdot z\cdot \omega^2 Thus the work required for moving this point to a distance
dz farther from the center of motion is: dW = -m\cdot z\cdot \omega^2\cdot dz = -m\cdot \omega^2\cdot d\left(\tfrac{1}{2} z^2\right) For a non-pointlike body one must integrate over this, with
m replaced by the mass density per unit
z. This gives: dW = - \tfrac{1}{2}dI \cdot \omega^2 which is exactly the energy required for keeping the angular momentum conserved. Note, that the above calculation can also be performed per mass, using
kinematics only. Thus the phenomena of figure skater accelerating tangential velocity while pulling their hands in, can be understood as follows in layman's language: The skater's palms are not moving in a straight line, so they are constantly accelerating inwards, but do not gain additional speed because the accelerating is always done when their motion inwards is zero. However, this is different when pulling the palms closer to the body: The acceleration due to rotation now increases the speed; but because of the rotation, the increase in speed does not translate to a significant speed inwards, but to an increase of the rotation speed.
Stationary-action principle In classical mechanics it can be shown that the rotational invariance of action functionals implies conservation of angular momentum. The action is defined in classical physics as a functional of positions, x_i (t) often represented by the use of square brackets, and the final and initial times. It assumes the following form in cartesian coordinates:S\left([x_{i}];t_{1},t_{2}\right)\equiv\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}d t\left(\frac{1}{2}m\frac{d x_{i}}{d t}\ \frac{d x_{i}}{d t}-V(x_{i})\right)where the repeated indices indicate summation over the index. If the action is invariant of an infinitesimal transformation, it can be mathematically stated as: \delta S = S\left([x_{i}+\delta x_i];t_{1},t_{2}\right)-S\left([x_{i}];t_{1},t_{2}\right) =0. Under the transformation, x_i \rightarrow x_i + \delta x_i , the action becomes: S\left([x_{i}+\delta x_i];t_{1},t_{2}\right)=\!\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}d t\left(\frac{1}{2}m\frac{d(x_{i}+\delta x_{i})}{d t}\frac{d(x_{i}+\delta x_{i})}{d t}-V(x_{i}+\delta x_{i})\right) where we can employ the expansion of the terms up-to first order in \delta x_i: \begin{align} \frac{d(x_i+\delta x_i)}{d t} \frac{d( x_{i}+\delta x_{i})}{ d t } &\simeq\frac{d x_{i}}{d t} \frac{d x_{i}}{d t}-2\frac{d^{2}x_{i}}{d t^{2}}\delta x_{i}+2\frac{d}{d t}\left(\delta x_{i}\frac{d x_{i}}{d t}\right)\\ V(x_{i}+\delta x_{i}) & \simeq V(x_{i})+\delta x_{i}\frac{\partial V}{\partial x_i}\\ \end{align}giving the following change in action: S[x_{i}+\delta x_{i}]\simeq S[x_{i}]+\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}d t\,\delta x_{i}\left(- \frac{\partial V}{\partial x_i}-m{\frac{d^{2}x_{i}}{d t^{2}}}\right)+m\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}d t{\frac{d}{d t}}\left(\delta x_{i}{\frac{d x_{i}}{d t}}\right). Since all rotations can be expressed as
matrix exponential of skew-symmetric matrices, i.e. as R(\hat n,\theta) = e^{M \theta} where M is a skew-symmetric matrix and \theta is angle of rotation, we can express the change of coordinates due to the rotation R(\hat n,\delta \theta ), up-to first order of infinitesimal angle of rotation, \delta \theta as: \delta x_i = M_{ij} x_j \delta \theta . Combining the equation of motion and
rotational invariance of action, we get from the above equations that:0=\delta S=\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}d t\frac{d}{d t}\left(m\frac{d x_{i}}{d t}\delta x_{i}\right)= M_{i j}\,\delta \theta \, m \,x_{j}\frac{d x_{i}}{d t}\Bigg\vert_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}Since this is true for any matrix M_{ij} that satisfies M_{ij} = - M_{ji} , it results in the conservation of the following quantity: \ell_{ij}(t) := m\left(x_i \frac{dx_j}{dt}-x_j \frac{dx_i}{dt}\right), as \ell_{ij}(t_1)=\ell_{ij}(t_2). This corresponds to the conservation of angular momentum throughout the motion.
Lagrangian formalism In
Lagrangian mechanics, angular momentum for rotation around a given axis, is the
conjugate momentum of the
generalized coordinate of the angle around the same axis. For example, L_z, the angular momentum around the z axis, is: L_z = \frac{\partial \cal{L}}{\partial \dot\theta_z} where \cal{L} is the Lagrangian and \theta_z is the angle around the z axis. Note that \dot\theta_z, the time derivative of the angle, is the
angular velocity \omega_z. Ordinarily, the Lagrangian depends on the angular velocity through the kinetic energy: The latter can be written by separating the velocity to its radial and tangential part, with the tangential part at the x-y plane, around the z-axis, being equal to: \sum_i \tfrac{1}{2}m_i {v_T}_i^2 = \sum_i \tfrac{1}{2} m_i \left(x_i^2 + y_i^2\right) { {\omega_z}_i}^2 where the subscript i stands for the i-th body, and m, v_T and \omega_zstand for mass, tangential velocity around the z-axis and angular velocity around that axis, respectively. For a body that is not point-like, with density
ρ, we have instead: \frac{1}{2}\int \rho(x,y,z) \left(x_i^2 + y_i^2\right) { {\omega_z}_i}^2\,dx\,dy = \frac{1}{2} {I_z}_i { {\omega_z}_i}^2 where integration runs over the area of the body, and
Iz is the moment of inertia around the z-axis. Thus, assuming the potential energy does not depend on
ωz (this assumption may fail for electromagnetic systems), we have the angular momentum of the
ith object: \begin{align} {L_z}_i &= \frac{\partial \cal{L} }{\partial { {\omega_z}_i} } = \frac{\partial E_k}{\partial { {\omega_z}_i} } \\ &= {I_z}_i \cdot {\omega_z}_i \end{align} We have thus far rotated each object by a separate angle; we may also define an overall angle
θz by which we rotate the whole system, thus rotating also each object around the z-axis, and have the overall angular momentum: L_z = \sum_i {I_z}_i \cdot {\omega_z}_i From
Euler–Lagrange equations it then follows that: 0 = \frac{\partial \cal{L} }{\partial { {\theta_z}_i} } - \frac{d}{dt}\left(\frac{\partial \cal{L} }{\partial { {\dot\theta_z}_i}}\right) = \frac{\partial \cal{L} }{\partial { {\theta_z}_i} } - \frac{d{L_z}_i}{dt} Since the lagrangian is dependent upon the angles of the object only through the potential, we have: \frac{d{L_z}_i}{dt} = \frac{\partial \cal{L}}{\partial { {\theta_z}_i} } = -\frac{\partial V}{\partial { {\theta_z}_i} } which is the torque on the
ith object. Suppose the system is invariant to rotations, so that the potential is independent of an overall rotation by the angle
θz (thus it may depend on the angles of objects only through their differences, in the form V({\theta_z}_i, {\theta_z}_j) = V({\theta_z}_i - {\theta_z}_j)). We therefore get for the total angular momentum: \frac{d L_z}{dt} = -\frac{\partial V}{\partial {\theta_z} } = 0 And thus the angular momentum around the z-axis is conserved. This analysis can be repeated separately for each axis, giving conservation of the angular momentum vector. However, the angles around the three axes cannot be treated simultaneously as generalized coordinates, since they are not independent; in particular, two angles per point suffice to determine its position. While it is true that in the case of a rigid body, fully describing it requires, in addition to three
translational degrees of freedom, also specification of three rotational degrees of freedom; however these cannot be defined as rotations around the
Cartesian axes (see
Euler angles). This caveat is reflected in quantum mechanics in the non-trivial
commutation relations of the different components of the
angular momentum operator.
Hamiltonian formalism Equivalently, in
Hamiltonian mechanics the Hamiltonian can be described as a function of the angular momentum. As before, the part of the kinetic energy related to rotation around the z-axis for the
ith object is: \frac{1}{2} {I_z}_i { {\omega_z}_i}^2 = \frac{ { {L_z}_i}^2}{2 {I_z}_i} which is analogous to the energy dependence upon momentum along the z-axis, \frac{ { {p_z}_i}^2}{ {2m}_i}. Hamilton's equations relate the angle around the z-axis to its conjugate momentum, the angular momentum around the same axis: \begin{align} \frac{d{\theta_z}_i}{dt} &= \frac{\partial \mathcal{H} }{\partial {L_z}_i} = \frac{ {L_z}_i}{ {I_z}_i} \\ \frac{d{L_z}_i}{dt} &= -\frac{\partial \mathcal{H} }{\partial {\theta_z}_i} = -\frac{\partial V}{\partial {\theta_z}_i} \end{align} The first equation gives {L_z}_i = {I_z}_i \cdot { {\dot{\theta}_z}_i} = {I_z}_i \cdot {\omega_z}_i And so we get the same results as in the Lagrangian formalism. Note, that for combining all axes together, we write the kinetic energy as: E_k = \frac{1}{2}\sum_i \frac{|\mathbf{p}_i|^2}{2m_i} = \sum_i \left(\frac{ {p_r}_i^2}{2m_i} + \frac{1}{2} {\mathbf{L}_i}^\textsf{T}{I_i}^{-1} \mathbf{L}_i\right) where
pr is the momentum in the radial direction, and the
moment of inertia is a 3-dimensional matrix; bold letters stand for 3-dimensional vectors. For point-like bodies we have: E_k = \sum_i \left(\frac{ {p_r}_i^2}{2m_i} + \frac{|{\mathbf{L}_i}|^2}{2m_i {r_i}^2}\right) This form of the kinetic energy part of the Hamiltonian is useful in analyzing
central potential problems, and is easily transformed to a
quantum mechanical work frame (e.g. in the
hydrogen atom problem). == Angular momentum in orbital mechanics ==