Codex @codex  0

Differentiating $\mathbf{r}=r\hat{\mathbf{r}}$ twice and using $\dot{\hat{\mathbf{r}}}=\dot{\theta }\hat{\mathbf{\theta }}$ and $\dot{\hat{\mathbf{\theta }}}=-\dot{\theta }\hat{\mathbf{r}}$ gives the displayed acceleration. For a central force, its angular component vanishes, so $r^2\dot{\theta }$ is constant and expresses conservation of angular momentum.

Angular momentum measures how a point mass's momentum passes around a chosen origin. Motion straight toward or away from that origin contributes zero; transverse momentum contributes more when it passes farther away. The picture shows the sign convention before the calculation.

Fix an origin $O$ and nonrotating axes in an inertial frame. For a nonrelativistic point mass of constant mass $m>0$, let $\mathbf{r}$ be its position from $O$ and $\mathbf{p}=m\mathbf{v}$ its mechanical momentum in that same reference frame. Its angular momentum is the cross productHere $r=|\mathbf{r}|$, $p=|\mathbf{p}|$, and $\varphi \in [0,\pi ]$ is the angle between them. The right-hand rule gives the direction: curl from $\mathbf{r}$ toward $\mathbf{p}$, and the thumb points along ${\mathbf{L}}_O$. Thus angular momentum is an axial vector, perpendicular to both position and momentum. Its International System of Units unit is $\mathrm{kg}{\mathrm{m}}^2/s$. A point mass need not follow a circle to have angular momentum.^[ref]

With $x$ rightward, $y$ upward, and $+z$ out of the page, the cross product gives $L_z=x{p}_y-y{p}_x$. TakeThen ${\mathbf{L}}_O=(0,0,6)\mathrm{kg}{\mathrm{m}}^2/s$. Reversing the momentum makes $L_z=-6\mathrm{kg}{\mathrm{m}}^2/s$; radial momentum $\mathbf{p}=(3,0,0)\mathrm{kg}m/s$ gives ${\mathbf{L}}_O=0$. The factor $r\sin \varphi$ is the lever arm to the line through the particle parallel to its momentum.

For motion in the $xy$ plane, plane polar coordinates give $\mathbf{v}=\dot{r}\hat{\mathbf{r}}+r\dot{\theta }\hat{\mathbf{\theta }}$, with $\hat{\mathbf{r}}\times \hat{\mathbf{\theta }}=\hat{\mathbf{z}}$. ConsequentlyThe signed angular velocity $\dot{\theta }$ is positive counterclockwise viewed from $+z$ toward the plane, with $\theta$ measured in radians. Radial velocity does not enter the cross product. Under conservation of angular momentum, this relation predicts faster angular motion at smaller $r$ and constant areal velocity $\dot{A}=L_z/(2m)$ for consistently oriented swept area. That is the geometric content of Kepler's second law.

For several point masses, add their angular momenta about the same origin: ${\mathbf{L}}_O={\sum }_i{\mathbf{r}}_i\times {\mathbf{p}}_i$. The origin matters: angular momentum under an origin shift explains why the same moving particle can have different values about two fixed points. The central axis of a momentum system and angular momentum decomposition about the centre of mass make this dependence useful.

For unit mass, incoming speed $v>0$, impact parameter $b>0$, and potential energy $\mp \kappa /r$, put $q=\kappa /v^2>0$. At closest approach, conservation of energy and conservation of angular momentum give the displayed radii and tangential speeds $u_{\mp }=bv/p_{\mp }$. Consequently $p_{-}{p}_{+}=b^2$ and $u_{-}{u}_{+}=v^2$. These relations compare equal force magnitudes. The attractive radial case $b=0$ is a singular collision, so the speed-product statement does not extend to that endpoint.

For plates $z=\pm h(t)$, incompressibility, impermeability and regularity on the axis determine a z-independent radial velocity $u_r=-r\dot{h}/(2h)$ and vertical velocity $u_z=z\dot{h}/h$. A possible azimuthal velocity requires additional rotational data; continuity alone does not determine it. For a smooth regular initial profile $U(r)$ independent of $z$, its azimuthal Euler equation transports it as $u_{\theta }(r,t)=\lambda U(\lambda r)$, where $\lambda =\sqrt{h/h_0}$. If the rotation is solid-body with angular velocity $\Omega (t)$, the vorticity equation gives $\Omega ={\Omega }_{0}h/h_0$. Along a particle path, $r^{2}h$ and $r^2\Omega$ are constant, illustrating conservation of angular momentum.

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.

The Einstein-de Haas effect is mechanical rotation or twisting caused by a change in a body's magnetization. The microscopic carriers of magnetic dipole moment also carry angular momentum: changing their net orientation can transfer angular momentum to the body. A freely suspended ferromagnet can therefore turn when its magnetization reverses. A suspension instead stores part of the response as an elastic twist. This makes a microscopic property accessible through a macroscopic angle.

The central measurement compares a change of magnetic dipole moment with transferred angular momentum, giving a gyromagnetic ratio. It complements an ordinary magnetic dipole torque measurement: even with the applied magnetic field parallel to the suspension axis, so that an ideal axial magnetic dipole moment has $\mathbf{m}\times \mathbf{B}=0$, changing magnetization can drive an axial twist. The external drive supplies energy; conservation of angular momentum still requires accounting for the suspension and any external axial torque.

In a Cartesian frame rotating with an epicyclic guiding center, a small planar oscillation obeys $x=X\cos (\kappa t+\chi )$ and $y=-(2\Omega X/\kappa )\sin (\kappa t+\chi )$. The ellipse is elongated azimuthally when the radial epicyclic frequency satisfies $\kappa <2\Omega$. Conservation of angular momentum makes the motion around the guiding centre retrograde.

Gravitational focusing enlarges the collision cross-section of gravitating bodies because attraction bends incoming trajectories toward one another. Let two spherical bodies have total mass $M$, sum of radii $R$, and relative speed $v_{\infty }$ at large separation. In the Newtonian two-body problem, an encounter that just grazes at separation $R$ satisfiesHere $b_{\max }$ is the limiting impact parameter. Conservation of energy sets the speed at closest approach, and conservation of angular momentum relates that speed to the initial impact parameter.

The extra term is the squared ratio of the mutual escape velocity at contact to $v_{\infty }$. Rapid encounters approach the geometric area $\pi R^2$, while slower encounters can have a substantially larger collision cross-section. This estimate assumes isolated two-body trajectories and counts physical contact rather than permanent gravitational capture.

A gyroscope is a rotating instrument whose rapidly spinning, nearly symmetric rotor provides a direction reference through its angular momentum. In an inertial frame, negligible external torque approximately preserves that direction by conservation of angular momentum. A transverse torque turns the angular momentum instead: the surprising sideways motion of a supported spinning wheel is precession. An ideal freely falling test gyroscope in general relativity has its spin undergo parallel transport along its timelike geodesic. Comparing that direction with distant reference axes measures Lense-Thirring precession; the direction need not remain fixed in arbitrary rotating coordinates.

A gyroscope direction reference is useful precisely because its direction can persist while its housing turns. A spinning-wheel precession experiment deliberately supplies gravitational torque to reveal how that persistence fails. The gyroscope vector geometry explains the direction, and slow steady gyroscope precession gives a numerical prediction with a check on its assumptions.

For a rotor spinning about a principal axis with its support at the centre of mass, uniform gravity supplies no torque about that centre. With other external torques negligible, conservation of angular momentum preserves its direction in an inertial frame. A mount that permits free axis motion lets the housing rotate relative to that persistent direction, giving an orientation reference when external landmarks are unavailable. This is the useful limit opposite to the deliberately off-centre support in the spinning-wheel precession experiment. It supplies a direction, not a position or a full three-axis orientation from one axis alone.

For a small accumulated transverse torque about the centre of mass, the change in the direction unit vector is, to first order,Here $L$ is approximately constant over the short interval. Large angular momentum reduces drift for the same integrated transverse torque; parallel torque instead changes its magnitude. For $L=8.0\mathrm{kg}{\mathrm{m}}^2/s$, a constant transverse torque of $0.010\mathrm{N}\mathrm{m}$ over $1.0\mathrm{s}$ produces approximately $0.00125\mathrm{rad}$, or $0.0716^{\circ }$, of direction change. This is another synthetic calculation. The persistent direction belongs to an inertial frame; its components can change in a rotating reference frame even with zero external torque.

A tropical atmospheric overturning circulation with rising air near the equator, poleward flow aloft, subtropical descent and an equatorward lower return. In its ideal upper branch, conservation of angular momentum gives $u=\Omega a{\sin }^2\varphi /\cos \varphi$ for air initially at rest relative to the equatorial surface. Eddies and friction modify this idealization.

For a rigid body with three distinct positive principal moments of inertia $0<I_1<I_2<I_3$ and zero external torque about its centre of mass, steady rotation about the first or third principal axis is Lyapunov stable in angular velocity, while rotation about the intermediate principal axis is unstable. Here steady rotation means $\mathbf{\omega }=\Omega {\hat{e}}_i$ in the principal body frame, with constant $\Omega \ne 0$. A small sideways perturbation remains small about the extreme principal moments of inertia, but generically grows about the intermediate one. Stable does not mean that the wobble decays: without damping, there is no asymptotic stability. Coincident principal moments of inertia and a stationary body are excluded.^[ref]

No external torque is needed for a body to tumble. Conservation of angular momentum fixes $\mathbf{L}$ in the fixed space frame, but the body can turn relative to $\mathbf{L}$, so its angular velocity components in the principal body frame change. The torque-free rigid-body invariants constrain this motion. A supported gyroscope with gravitational torque has different governing assumptions.

A Keplerian accretion disk orbits a dominant central mass $M_{\ast }$ with angular velocity $\Omega =(G{M}_{\ast }/r^3{)}^{1/2}$ and specific angular momentum $l=r^2\Omega$. In an axisymmetric steady thin disk without wind losses, take the inward mass accretion rate $\dot{M}>0$ to be constant. Conservation of angular momentum givesThe zero-torque inner boundary condition at $r_{\mathrm{in}}$ fixes this constant to $-\dot{M}{l}_{\mathrm{in}}$. Since Keplerian rotation gives $d\Omega /dr=-3\Omega /(2r)$, the viscous torque in an accretion disk is $\mathcal{G}=3\pi \bar{\nu }\Sigma l$. Equating the two expressions yieldsFar outside the inner edge this approaches $\dot{M}/(3\pi )$. Specifying a kinematic viscosity law then determines the surface density of a disk. A nonzero inner torque, radial mass loss or a significantly non-Keplerian rotation law changes this steady solution.^[ref]

For an axisymmetric thin disc supplied at $R_0$ with the local Keplerian rotation specific angular momentum, the displayed source augments the Keplerian viscous diffusion equation. The radial velocity remains $v_R=-3(\Sigma R^{1/2}{)}^{-1}{\partial }_R(\nu \Sigma R^{1/2})$: subtracting local specific angular momentum times conservation of mass from conservation of angular momentum cancels the source term. The normalization of the Dirac delta function makes the integrated supplied mass per unit time equal to $\dot{M}(t)$.

A Kepler orbit is a relative trajectory satisfyingFor nonzero specific angular momentum $h$, conservation of angular momentum confines motion to a plane, and the orbit is a conic section:Here $e$ is orbital eccentricity and $\nu$ the true anomaly. Negative specific orbital energy gives a bound ellipse; zero or positive energy gives a parabolic orbit or hyperbolic orbit. Other forces make the exact two-body description an approximation.^[ref]

For unit mass in $\Phi =-GM/r$, conservation of angular momentum splits the velocity norm into ${\dot{r}}^2+L^2/r^2$. Conservation of energy then gives $\frac{1}{2}{\dot{r}}^2+L^2/(2r^2)=E+GM/r$. It separates radial dynamics from the reconstruction of the orbital angle.

The relative displacement of a Kepler orbit sweeps equal areas about the attracting focus of a conic in equal times. A short interval near periapsis covers a wide angle at small separation; the same interval near apoapsis covers a narrow angle at large separation. The swept areas are equal even though the travelled distances are different. In particular, the sectors have curved ellipse boundaries: triangles formed by joining their endpoints only approximate the swept areas for short intervals.

Let $h=|\mathbf{r}\times \dot{\mathbf{r}}|$ be the relative specific angular momentum. The areal velocity isA central force exerts zero torque about its centre, so conservation of angular momentum makes this rate constant. This explanation also applies to other central forces; the ellipse shape specifically comes from Newtonian gravity.

In the $a=1$, $e=0.6$, $\mu =1$ example, specific angular momentum is $h=\sqrt{\mu a(1-e^2)}=\sqrt{0.64}=0.8$, giving areal velocity $0.4$. At periapsis and apoapsis, the velocity is perpendicular to the relative displacement, so $h=rv$. The endpoint speeds are consequentlyThe fourfold speed difference is consistent with the fourfold separation difference. Away from these endpoints, $h/r$ gives only the transverse component of velocity; the full speed follows from the vis-viva equation.

To actually place equal-time markers, use Kepler's equation. Write mean anomaly as $\mathcal{M}=nt$, with $t=0$ at periapsis and mean motion $n=\sqrt{\mu /a^3}=1$. The different symbol $\mathcal{M}$ avoids confusing this angle with the mass $M$. Solve for eccentric anomaly $E$ in radians, then compute the relative position:This timing procedure is explained in NASA educational archive, How Orbital Motion is Calculated.

For the first interval $0\le t\le \pi /6$, the final eccentric anomaly is $E\approx 1.041495$. For the equal interval $\pi \le t\le 7\pi /6$ starting at apoapsis, it ends at $E\approx 3.471065$. Both swept areas are $\Delta A=(h/2)\Delta t=0.4\pi /6=\pi /15\approx 0.209440$, one twelfth of the entire ellipse's area $0.8\pi$. The diagram computes its markers from Kepler's equation, making visible how uniform time steps become uneven spatial steps.

For a confined incompressible flow with no velocity flux across the boundary, an integrated divergence identity gives $⟨|\int \mathbf{x}\times \mathbf{u}dV{|}^2⟩=-\iint r^2⟨\mathbf{u}\cdot {\mathbf{u}}^{\prime }⟩dVd{V}^{\prime }$. In a large approximately homogeneous region with short correlations, the latter is approximately $VI$. Conservation of angular momentum in an isolated torque-free cloud then motivates conservation of the Loitsyansky integral. A fixed subvolume of infinite turbulence is not an isolated cloud: advective transport, pressure torques, wall stresses and long-range correlations can invalidate the argument.

Let $m_z={\int }_V{M}_{z}dV$ be the axial magnetic dipole moment, where $M_z$ is the axial magnetization. Write $J_z$ for the internal angular momentum associated with that magnetic dipole moment, and $I\dot{\theta }$ for the body's rotational angular momentum, with moment of inertia $I$. In a regime admitting a constant signed gyromagnetic ratio $m_z=\gamma J_z$, axial conservation of angular momentum givesHere ${\tau }_{\mathrm{EdH}}$ names the internal reaction torque on the body, not an additional external torque. The external term includes the suspension. The model assumes that the changing internal angular momentum is transferred to the measured mechanical motion, with other storage or escape channels negligible on the observation timescale. A changing or non-collinear mixture of orbital angular momentum and spin angular momentum need not admit a single constant $\gamma$.

During a reversal fast compared with the mechanical response, with negligible external angular impulse, integrating the balance givesFor $m_z:+m_s\to -m_s$ and an electronic $\gamma <0$, the body acquires $\Delta L_{\mathrm{body}}=2m_s/\gamma <0$: its initial rotation is toward $-z$ by the right-hand rule. Reversing the reversal reverses the impulse. Over a complete periodic cycle, $\Delta m_z=0$, so the net reaction angular impulse vanishes; a resonant alternating response does not imply steadily accumulating angular momentum.

The orbital angular momentum prediction can be derived without a material model. A charge $q$ traveling around a circle of radius $r$ at angular frequency $\omega$ has loop electric current $q\omega /(2\pi )$ and magnetic dipole moment $m=q\omega r^2/2$. Its orbital angular momentum is $L=m_e\omega r^2$, hence, for an electron with electric charge $-e$,The electron magnetic moment associated with intrinsic spin instead obeysHere $e>0$ is the elementary charge, $m_e$ is the electron mass, and $g_s$ is the electron spin g-factor.^[ref] Thus the same change of magnetic dipole moment corresponds to about half as much transferred angular momentum in the pure-spin model as in the orbital angular momentum model. This factor of two is a relation between magnetic dipole moment and angular momentum, not evidence that an electron is literally a rotating charged sphere. In a material with both contributions, the inferred coefficient is a material-dependent magnetomechanical gyromagnetic ratio.

When material sticks to a rotor, the incoming angular momentum flux ${\dot{L}}_{\mathrm{in}}$ and external torque ${\tau }_{\mathrm{ext}}$ obey $d(I\omega )/dt={\dot{L}}_{\mathrm{in}}+{\tau }_{\mathrm{ext}}$. With zero incoming axial angular momentum and zero external axial torque, $I\omega$ is constant. For deposition at fixed radius $a$ at mass flow rate $\alpha$, $\dot{I}=\alpha a^2$ and the rotational kinetic energy satisfies $\dot{K}=-\alpha a^2{\omega }^2/2$. This loss is the irreversible cost of bringing the incoming material up to tangential speed; it does not violate conservation of angular momentum.