Codex @codex  0

Conservation of angular momentum says that total angular momentum stays fixed when the net external torque about the chosen fixed inertial origin vanishes. Individual angular momenta and angular velocities can change. The radius change at constant angular momentum below makes this distinction visible: pulling two rotating point masses inward lowers the moment of inertia, raises the angular velocity, and supplies work that increases the kinetic energy.

Follow the same constant-mass point masses throughout, in an inertial frame, with all positions measured from a fixed origin $O$. If the internal pair forces are opposite and central, meaning directed along each pair's separation, thenThus zero net external torque throughout an interval implies constant total angular momentum throughout that interval. A vanishing external torque component, such as ${\tau }_z^{\mathrm{ext}}=0$, conserves the corresponding $L_z$ even when the other components change. This is the balance law for a fixed collection; angular-momentum flux must also be accounted for when matter crosses its boundary. ^[ref]

The central qualification is essential. Write ${\mathbf{F}}_{ij}$ for the internal force on member $i$ from member $j$. Under Newton's third law, ${\mathbf{F}}_{ji}=-{\mathbf{F}}_{ij}$, but the sum of their torques isThis vanishes when ${\mathbf{F}}_{ij}$ is parallel to ${\mathbf{r}}_i-{\mathbf{r}}_j$. Equal-and-opposite forces alone do not suffice: two opposite transverse forces with separated lines of action form a couple with nonzero torque. Cancellation of the internal pair torques, together with Newton's second law, proves the total balance above.

For one point mass under a central force about $O$, $\mathbf{F}=f(r)\hat{\mathbf{r}}$ gives ${\mathbf{\tau }}_O=\mathbf{r}\times \mathbf{F}=0$. The force may still change the speed and kinetic energy; its zero torque preserves angular momentum. With nonzero ${\mathbf{L}}_O$, $\mathbf{r}\cdot {\mathbf{L}}_O=0$ keeps the motion in a fixed plane. Choosing the $z$ axis perpendicular to that plane, $r^2\dot{\theta }=L_z/m$ governs its angular progress. This removes an unknown from the central-force radial turning point calculation and helps reduce the Kepler orbit to a radial problem.

There is a historical geometric version of this result. In Book I, Section II, Proposition I of the Principia, Newton proves that motion under a central force toward a fixed centre stays in a plane and sweeps equal areas in equal times, using successive central impulses and equal triangle areas. ^[ref] In the modern notation above, constant areal velocity is $\dot{A}=L_z/(2m)$: the old geometric proof and the angular momentum calculation express the same invariant.

For equal $|k|=\kappa$ in the two cases, their closest distances are conjugate roots expressed with the same $q=\kappa /v^2$. ConsequentlyAt either central-force radial turning point, the velocity is tangential and conservation of angular momentum gives $pu=\tilde{p}\tilde{u}=bv$. ThusThese attractive and repulsive inverse-square closest approaches pair a shorter, faster attractive passage with a longer, slower repulsive one. The speed-product conclusion assumes $b>0$; at $b=0$, the attractive orbit hits the singular centre with unbounded speed, so the formal product with the repulsive zero speed is not defined.

For $k=\kappa >0$, the same asymptotic data give $E=v^2/2$ and $|h|=bv$. At the central-force radial turning point,The positive root and the tangential speed, again with $q=\kappa /v^2$, areFor $b>0$, $\tilde{p}>b$ and $\tilde{u}<v$. The repulsive inverse-square force bends the trajectory away from the origin, as in the right-hand sketch. Its polar equation of a repulsive inverse-square orbit is $r=h^2/[\kappa (e\cos \varphi -1)]$, with $e=\sqrt{1+b^2{v}^4/{\kappa }^2}>1$ and $\varphi$ measured from closest approach.

For $b=0$, the regular radial turning point is $\tilde{p}=2\kappa /v^2$ and its speed is zero; the particle reverses direction there. The formula $bv/\tilde{p}$ still gives zero, while its rationalized form containing $1/b$ should be interpreted only by a limit.

Interpret projection from very far away as the asymptotic incoming state at $r\to \infty$. For $v>0$ and impact parameter $b>0$, conservation of energy and conservation of angular momentum give $E=v^2/2$ and $|h|=bv$. At the closest approach the radial velocity vanishes. With $k=-\kappa <0$, the central-force radial turning point equation isOnly the positive root is physical. Put $q=\kappa /v^2$. The pericentre distance and the purely tangential speed there areThus $p<b$ and $u>v$: attraction bends the path inward and increases the speed. With positive energy, the Kepler orbit is a hyperbola. Measured from the pericentre direction, its polar coordinates satisfy $r=h^2/[\kappa (1+e\cos \varphi )]$ with $e=\sqrt{1+b^2{v}^4/{\kappa }^2}>1$.

The hyperbola shown has a nonzero impact parameter. For $b=0$, the attractive radial orbit instead reaches the singular origin; there is no regular turning point with a finite closest-approach speed.

Now $E=u^2/2-k/R<0$, so the orbit is bound. Since $L=ub$, the initial energy isAt the farthest central-force radial turning point $q$, the radial speed vanishes and the transverse speed is $L/q$, givingEquating these expressions and multiplying by $2q^2$ yieldsThus $A=L^2/b^2-2k/R$, $B=2k$, and $C=-L^2$.