Projective deduction of the non-trivial first integral to the Euler problem: an explicit computation

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2511.18569
• Title: Projective deduction of the non-trivial first integral to the Euler problem: an explicit computation
• Authors: Gabriella Pinzari (University of Padova), Lei Zhao (Dalian University of Technology)
• Classification: math-ph (Mathematical Physics), math.MP
• Submission Date: November 25, 2025 (arXiv submission)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.18569

Abstract

This paper investigates the geometric derivation of non-trivial first integrals for the Euler two-fixed center problem. The authors provide an explicit geometric construction that interprets the first integral of this problem as the energy of its projection onto an ellipsoid. Compared to previous research, this work is based on a different construction method and includes complete explicit calculations. A byproduct is the proof that the Kepler problem admits two integrable mirror problems (equivalent to three quadratic integrals, including energy), which exemplifies its superintegrability.

Research Background and Motivation

1. Core Problem

This paper studies the Euler two-fixed center problem: the motion of a point mass in three-dimensional Euclidean space under Newtonian gravitational attraction from two fixed masses. The Hamiltonian function is:

$J(p, q) = \frac{\|p\|^2}{2} - \frac{m_-}{\|q + c\|} - \frac{m_+}{\|q - c\|}$

where $c = (1, 0, 0) \in \mathbb{R}^3$, and the two attractive centers are located at $\pm c$.

2. Problem Significance

• Integrability: This system is one of the few completely integrable three-degree-of-freedom systems in classical mechanics, studied by Jacobi, Euler, and Lagrange
• First Integrals: Besides the Hamiltonian $J$, the system admits two Poisson-commuting first integrals:
  • $\Theta = (q \times p) \cdot c$ (component of angular momentum along the line connecting centers)
  • $E$ (non-trivial integral with complex form)

3. Limitations of Existing Methods

The traditional Euler method derives the first integral $E$ through ellipsoidal coordinate transformation:

• Requires lengthy algebraic manipulations
• $E$ appears as a "mysterious byproduct" rather than the main object of study
• Method depends on complex coordinate transformation formulas
• Lacks intuitive geometric interpretation

4. Research Motivation

Inspired by Albouy's work on projective dynamics of the spherical Kepler problem, the authors aim to:

• Provide a geometric derivation of $E$, so it naturally emerges as the energy of a "mirror problem"
• Avoid complex algebraic calculations through plane-ellipsoid projection construction
• Extend the method to the two-center problem (simple spherical projection is insufficient)

Core Contributions

1. Novel Geometric Construction: Proposes a plane-ellipsoid projection method that projects the motion of the Euler two-center problem onto an ellipsoid in four-dimensional space
2. Explicit Calculations: Provides complete explicit computational procedures proving that the motion of projected points on the ellipsoid possesses a conserved "ellipsoid energy" $G$
3. Geometric Interpretation of First Integrals: Proves a simple relationship between ellipsoid energy $G$ and the first integrals of the original problem: $G = J + \frac{E}{2} - \frac{\Theta^2}{4}$
4. Superintegrability of the Kepler Problem: As a byproduct, proves that the Kepler problem (special case of the two-center problem) admits at least two integrable mirror problems (spherical and ellipsoidal projections), revealing its superintegrable structure
5. Avoidance of Complex Algebra: Compared to Euler's ellipsoidal coordinate method, this approach is more intuitive and computationally simpler

Method Details

Task Definition

Input: Equations of motion for the Euler two-center problem $\ddot{q} = -m_- \frac{q - c_-}{\|q - c_-\|^3} - m_+ \frac{q - c_+}{\|q - c_+\|^3}$

Output: Construct a geometric mapping such that:

1. Solutions of the original problem, when projected onto an ellipsoid, satisfy a conservative tangent vector field
2. The energy of this tangent vector field yields the first integrals of the original problem

Constraints: The projection mapping must preserve the integrable structure of the dynamics

Model Architecture

1. Embedding and Extension

Embed $\mathbb{R}^3$ into $\mathbb{R}^4$:

• Define $S := \mathbb{R}^3 \times \{1\} \subset \mathbb{R}^4$
• Extend original point $q = (x, y, z)$ to $\mathbf{q} = (x, y, z, 1) \in S$
• Extend attractive centers to $\mathbf{c}_\pm = (\pm c, 1) = (\pm 1, 0, 0, 1)$

2. Define New Norm (*-norm)

In $\mathbb{R}^4$, define: $\|(x, y, z, w)\|_* := \sqrt{x^2 + \frac{y^2}{2} + \frac{z^2}{2} + w^2}$

The corresponding inner product is: $((x_1, y_1, z_1, w_1), (x_2, y_2, z_2, w_2))_* = x_1x_2 + \frac{y_1y_2}{2} + \frac{z_1z_2}{2} + w_1w_2$

3. Construct Ellipsoid

Define the ellipsoid: $E := \{Q = (X, Y, Z, W) \in \mathbb{R}^4 : \|Q\|_* = 1\}$

This is actually the unit sphere with respect to the *-norm, appearing as an ellipsoid under the standard norm.

4. Central Projection Mapping

Define central projection from $S$ to $E$: $\pi : \mathbf{q} = (x, y, z, 1) \mapsto Q = \frac{\mathbf{q}}{\|\mathbf{q}\|_*}$

The inverse mapping is: $\pi^{-1} : Q \mapsto \mathbf{q} = \frac{Q}{\ell(Q)}, \quad \ell(X, Y, Z, W) := W$

Key relationship: $\ell(Q)\|\mathbf{q}\|_* = 1$

5. Time Reparameterization

Introduce new time parameter $\tau$: $\frac{d}{d\tau} := \frac{1}{\ell(Q(t))^2} \frac{d}{dt}$

Primes denote derivatives with respect to $\tau$.

Technical Innovations

1. Ellipsoid Rather Than Sphere

• For single-center Kepler problem, Albouy uses spherical projection
• For two-center problem, simple spherical projection is insufficient; ellipsoidal projection is needed
• The eccentricity of the ellipsoid encodes the interaction between the two attractive centers

2. Special *-norm Design

The choice of *-norm is not arbitrary:

• Coefficients for $y$ and $z$ directions are $1/\sqrt{2}$
• This ensures the critical identity (equation 22): $\frac{(-X + W)^2}{2} + \frac{(X + W)^2}{2} + \frac{Y^2}{2} + \frac{Z^2}{2} = 1$
• This identity simplifies distance formulas to integrable form

3. Conservation of Tangent Vector Field

By computing $Q''$ and taking inner product with $Q'$, prove:

• $Q''$ decomposes into tangential and normal components
• Normal component has form $f(Q, Q')Q$, orthogonal to $Q'$
• Tangential component yields conserved ellipsoid energy

4. Explicit Energy Formula

The explicit form of ellipsoid energy is: $G = \|Q'\|_*^2 - \sum_{j \in \{\pm\}} \frac{m_j (\mathbf{c}_j, Q)/\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{1 - (\mathbf{c}_j, Q)^2/2}}$

Core Theorem (Theorem 2.1)

Statement: The tangent vector field on ellipsoid $E_+$ is $Q'$-independent and conservative. The ellipsoid energy $G := \|Q'\|_*^2 - \sum_{j \in \{\pm\}} \frac{m_j (\mathbf{c}_j, Q)/\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{1 - (\mathbf{c}_j, Q)^2/2}}$ remains constant for all $\tau$.

Relation to Original Problem: Returning to original coordinates $q$ and original time $t$, the function $G$ becomes $G = J + \frac{E}{2} - \frac{\Theta^2}{4}$

where $J$, $E$, $\Theta$ are the first integrals in equations (1) and (3).

Proof Strategy

1. Compute $Q'$: $Q' = \dot{q}\|\mathbf{q}\|_* - \mathbf{q}(Q, \dot{q})_*$
2. Compute $Q''$: $Q'' = -\frac{\|\mathbf{q}\|_*^3}{\ell(Q)^3} \sum_{j \in \{\pm\}} \frac{m_j}{\|\mathbf{q}/\ell(Q) - \mathbf{c}_j\|^3} \left(\frac{Q}{\ell(Q)} - \mathbf{c}_j\right) + f(Q, Q')Q$
3. Inner Product to Eliminate Normal Component: $(Q'', Q')_* = \frac{1}{2}(\|Q'\|_*^2)'$ because $(Q, Q')_* \equiv 0$ ($Q$ lies on unit ellipsoid)
4. Simplify Distance Formula: Use identity (22) to simplify distance expressions
5. Integrate to Obtain Conserved Quantity: $\frac{d}{d\tau}\left(\|Q'\|_*^2 - \sum_j \frac{m_j(\mathbf{c}_j, Q)/\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{1 - (\mathbf{c}_j, Q)^2/2}}\right) = 0$
6. Coordinate Transformation Verification: Verify through explicit calculation that $G = J + E/2 - \Theta^2/4$

Experimental Setup

This is a pure theoretical mathematical physics paper with no numerical experiments or datasets. All results are obtained through analytical calculations and symbolic derivations.

Verification Methods

• Symbolic Computation: Using Lagrange identities, vector cross product properties, and standard tools
• Coordinate Transformations: Explicit calculation of *-norm and inner product expressions in original coordinates
• Identity Verification: Verification of critical identities such as equation (22)
• Consistency Checks: Verification that ellipsoid energy in original coordinates indeed yields $J + E/2 - \Theta^2/4$

Experimental Results

Main Results

Verification of Theorem 2.1: Through complete explicit calculations (pages 5-7), prove:

1. Ellipsoid Energy Conservation: $G = \|Q'\|_*^2 - \frac{m_-(\mathbf{c}_-, Q)/\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{1 - (\mathbf{c}_-, Q)^2/2}} - \frac{m_+(\mathbf{c}_+, Q)/\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{1 - (\mathbf{c}_+, Q)^2/2}}$ remains constant for all $\tau$
2. Relation to Original Integrals (equations 24-25): $G = \dot{x}^2 + \frac{\dot{y}^2}{2} + \frac{\dot{z}^2}{2} + \frac{1}{2}(x\dot{y} - y\dot{x})^2 + \frac{1}{4}(y\dot{z} - z\dot{y})^2 + \frac{1}{2}(z\dot{x} - x\dot{z})^2$$+ \frac{m_-(x-1)}{\sqrt{(x+1)^2 + y^2 + z^2}} - \frac{m_+(x+1)}{\sqrt{(x-1)^2 + y^2 + z^2}}$
3. Identity Verification: The above expression indeed equals $J + E/2 - \Theta^2/4$

Generalization Results (Remark 2.1)

Parametric Ellipsoid Family: For attractive centers at distance $2a$, the theorem still holds with ellipsoid: $E_a = \left\{X^2 + \frac{Y^2}{1+a^2} + \frac{Z^2}{1+a^2} + W^2 = 1\right\}$

Two Mirror Problems of Kepler Problem:

1. $a = 0$ (centers coincide): Ellipsoid degenerates to sphere, corresponding to Albouy's construction, energy yields angular momentum
2. $m_\pm = 0$ (one mass vanishes): Corresponds to Zhao et al.'s construction, energy yields anomaly of periapsis

This proves the superintegrability of the Kepler problem: there exist three independent quadratic integrals (energy, angular momentum, Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector).

Case Analysis

Geometric Intuition (Figure 1):

• Plane $S = \mathbb{R}^3 \times \{1\}$ contains the moving point mass
• Ellipsoid $E$ is centered at the origin
• Projection mapping $\pi$ maps orbits on the plane to the ellipsoid
• Orbits on the ellipsoid possess independent conserved energy

Physical Interpretation:

• Original problem: Point mass on plane under gravitational attraction from two centers
• Mirror problem: Point mass on ellipsoid under conservative tangential force
• Mirror energy encodes the non-trivial integral $E$ of the original problem

Related Work

1. History of Projective Dynamics

• Albouy (2013, 2015): Pioneering work studying projective interpretation of spherical Kepler problem
• Albouy & Zhao (2019): Lambert theorem and projective dynamics
• Zhao (2022): Projective dynamics of integrable Boltzmann billiard model
• Takeuchi & Zhao (2023, 2024): Projective integrable mechanical billiards, higher-dimensional forms

2. Classical Research on Euler Two-Center Problem

• Euler (1767): First study of two-center problem
• Lagrange (1766-1769): Further development
• Jacobi (1884): Systematic treatment in Lectures on Dynamics
• Pinzari (2019, 2024): Modern Hamiltonian approach

3. Positioning of This Paper

• Method Innovation: First systematic application of projective dynamics to two-center problem
• Complete Calculations: Provides complete explicit calculations, filling technical gaps in 1
• Geometric Unification: Unifies spherical projection (single center) and ellipsoidal projection (two centers) in same framework

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Successful Geometric Derivation: The non-trivial first integral $E$ of the Euler two-center problem can be naturally obtained as the energy of ellipsoidal projection
2. Computational Simplification: Compared to traditional ellipsoidal coordinate method, the projection method avoids complex coordinate transformations and algebraic manipulations
3. Revelation of Superintegrability: The Kepler problem admits at least two integrable mirror problems corresponding to different geometric projections
4. Method Generalizability: The projective dynamics framework may apply to other integrable systems

Limitations

1. Dimensional Restriction: Method primarily addresses $d = 2, 3$ dimensions; higher-dimensional generalization requires further research
2. Special Structure Dependence: The choice of ellipsoid (*-norm coefficients) is specific to the two-center problem; generalization to multi-center problems is unclear
3. Insufficient Physical Intuition: While the geometric construction is elegant, the physical meaning (why project to ellipsoid?) remains incompletely clear
4. Computational Complexity: Although simpler than ellipsoidal coordinates, explicit calculations (equations 19-25) remain quite involved
5. Incompleteness: The paper acknowledges omission of some technical details (such as specific form of function $\tilde{f}$)

Future Directions

1. Connection to Billiard Problems (reference 11): Authors explore connections to long-term three-body theory and Kepler billiards in subsequent work
2. Averaging Theory: Apply projection method to averaging and billiard-type problems
3. Multi-Center Generalization: Study cases with three or more attractive centers
4. Numerical Verification: Although theory is complete, numerical simulations could provide additional intuition
5. Quantization: Explore quantum mechanical counterparts of projective dynamics

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Mathematical Rigor:
   • Theorems stated clearly with complete proofs
   • All computational steps explicitly provided (equations 19-25)
   • Critical identities (such as equation 22) carefully verified
2. Geometric Insight:
   • Provides geometric interpretation of first integrals, not algebraic coincidence
   • Ellipsoidal projection construction is natural and elegant
   • Unifies spherical projection (single center) and ellipsoidal projection (two centers)
3. Technical Innovation:
   • Introduction of *-norm is key innovation, simplifying distance calculations
   • Time reparameterization technique eliminates complex time dependence
   • Tangential-normal decomposition cleverly exploits ellipsoid geometry
4. Theoretical Contribution:
   • Reveals new perspective on superintegrability of Kepler problem
   • Provides methodological framework for finding first integrals of other integrable systems
   • Connects classical mechanics, differential geometry, and dynamical systems theory
5. Writing Clarity:
   • Motivation clearly articulated, historical background thorough
   • Comparison with Euler's classical method aids understanding
   • Figure 1 provides useful geometric intuition

Weaknesses

1. Lengthy Calculations:
   • Despite claims of "simplification," calculations in equations 19-25 remain quite technical
   • Some intermediate steps (such as elimination of $\tilde{f}$) are omitted, affecting verifiability
   • Readers require considerable computational patience for complete understanding
2. Insufficient Physical Intuition:
   • Why are *-norm coefficients precisely $1, 1/\sqrt{2}, 1/\sqrt{2}, 1$?
   • What is the physical meaning of ellipsoidal projection?
   • Lacks deep discussion of physical interpretation of "mirror problems"
3. Unclear Generalizability:
   • Applicability of method to three-center or multi-center problems unclear
   • Generalization to other integrable systems (such as Toda lattice) not explored
   • Whether non-integrable systems can benefit from projective dynamics?
4. Missing Numerical Verification:
   • No numerical simulations verify theoretical results
   • Lack of orbit visualizations or concrete examples
   • May lack sufficient intuition for application-oriented readers
5. Literature Review:
   • Relationship to Takeuchi & Zhao (2023, 2024) could be discussed in more detail
   • Connection to billiard dynamics mentioned only in introduction, not deeply explored

Impact

1. Contribution to Field:
   • Important Theoretical Advance: Provides new geometric perspective on classical integrable systems
   • Methodological Innovation: Projective dynamics method may become standard tool for studying first integrals
   • Interdisciplinary Connection: Bridges Hamiltonian mechanics, symplectic geometry, and projective geometry
2. Practical Value:
   • Teaching Value: Provides new pathway for understanding integrability of Euler problem
   • Computational Advantage: May be more efficient than ellipsoidal coordinates for certain applications
   • Generalization Potential: Framework may apply to celestial mechanics, molecular dynamics, etc.
3. Reproducibility:
   • Highly Reproducible: All computational steps explicitly provided
   • Symbolic Computation Friendly: Can be verified using Mathematica/Maple
   • Conceptually Clear: Geometric construction easy to understand and implement

Applicable Scenarios

1. Theoretical Research:
   • Finding new integrable systems or first integrals
   • Studying superintegrability and symmetries
   • Understanding geometric structure of classical mechanics
2. Teaching Applications:
   • Case study in advanced classical mechanics courses
   • Demonstrating power of geometric methods in dynamical systems
   • Connecting historical (Euler) and modern (projective dynamics) approaches
3. Related Problems:
   • Long-term evolution of restricted three-body problem
   • Billiard dynamics and integrability
   • Perturbation theory in celestial mechanics
4. Inapplicable Scenarios:
   • Practical applications requiring efficient numerical computation (ellipsoidal coordinates may be faster)
   • Non-integrable or chaotic systems (advantages of projection method unclear)
   • High-dimensional or infinite-dimensional systems (method generalization difficult)

Key References

1 A. Albouy, There is a projective dynamics, Eur. Math. Soc. Newsletters, 89 (2013)

• Pioneering paper introducing concept of projective dynamics

2 A. Albouy, Projective dynamics and first integrals, Regul. Chaot. Dyn., 20, 247–276 (2015)

• Theoretical extension, systematic development of projective dynamics framework

7 C. G. J. Jacobi, Vorlesungen über Dynamik, Berlin (1884)

• Classical reference, systematic treatment of two-center problem

14 L. Zhao, Projective dynamics and an integrable Boltzmann billiard model, Comm. Cont. Math., 24(10) (2022)

• Important predecessor of this paper's method, addresses single-center case

Summary

This is a high-quality theoretical mathematical physics paper providing novel geometric interpretation of the classical Euler two-center problem. Main strengths are mathematical rigor, geometric intuition, and methodological innovation, successfully extending the projective dynamics framework from single-center to two-center cases. Main weaknesses are still-involved calculations, potentially stronger physical intuition, and unexplored generalization potential.

The core value of the paper lies in:

1. Providing geometric origin of first integrals, not algebraic coincidence
2. Revealing new perspective on superintegrability of Kepler problem
3. Providing methodological framework for studying first integrals of other integrable systems

For scholars working on Hamiltonian systems, integrability theory, and celestial mechanics, this is a paper worth careful study. For application-oriented readers, the theoretical depth may exceed practical needs, but the geometric ideas remain inspirational.