How to Find Potential Energy from Force in a Particle's Motion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter csnsc14320
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force Potential
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a particle of mass m moving in a fixed plane along a specified trajectory. Participants are tasked with sketching the trajectory, finding the force acting on the particle, determining its potential energy, calculating total energy as functions of time, and assessing the periodicity of the motion.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the derivation of force from the particle's motion and question the correctness of the equations presented. There is exploration of the relationship between force and potential energy, with some participants expressing confusion about the units and the gradient of potential energy.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants offering insights into the mathematical relationships involved. Some have provided guidance on the gradient and integration of potential energy, while others are questioning the assumptions made regarding the equations and their dependencies on time and position.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating through the implications of their equations, particularly regarding the functional dependence of potential energy on the trajectory of the particle. There is an emphasis on ensuring proper integration techniques and understanding the relationships between variables in the context of the problem.

csnsc14320
Messages
57
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


A particle of mass m moves in a fixed plane along the trajectory [tex]\vec{r} = \hat{i} A cos(3 \omega t) + \hat{j} A cos(\omega t)[/tex].
(a) Sketch the trajectory of the particle.
(b) Find the force acting on the particle
(c) find its potential energy
(d) find its total energy as functions of time
(e) is the motion periodic? if so, find the period

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


Part (a) I won't worry about for now
Part (b): I think this is correct:
[tex]\vec{r} = \hat{i} A cos(\omega t) + \hat{j} A cos(3 \omega t)[/tex].
[tex]\vec{v} = -\hat{i} A \omega sin(\omega t) - \hat{j} 3 A \omega sin(3 \omega t)[/tex]
[tex]\vec{a} = -\hat{i} A \omega^2 cos(\omega t) - \hat{j} 9 A \omega^2 cos(3 \omega t})[/tex]

[tex]\vec{F} = m \vec{a}[/tex]
[tex]\vec{F} = m (-\hat{i} A \omega^2 cos(\omega t) - \hat{j} 9 A \omega^2 cos(3 \omega t}))[/tex]

So, for part (b), this is where I'm wondering if I am correct:
[tex]F = -\frac{d U}{d t}[/tex]
[tex]U = m( A \omega sin(\omega t) + 3 A \omega sin(3 \omega t))[/tex]

And, if this is correct, would this be the kinetic energy as a function of time?
[tex]K(t) = \frac{1}{2} m (-\hat{i} A \omega sin(\omega t) - \hat{j} 3 A \omega sin(3 \omega t))^2[/tex]
Which would make part (c):
[tex]E = \frac{1}{2} m (-\hat{i} A \omega sin(\omega t) - \hat{j} 3 A \omega sin(3 \omega t))^2 + m( A \omega sin(\omega t) + 3 A \omega sin(3 \omega t))[/tex]

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
csnsc14320 said:
[tex]\vec{r} = \hat{i} A cos(\omega t) + \hat{j} A cos(\omega t)[/tex].
[tex]\vec{v} = -\hat{i} A \omega sin(\omega t) - \hat{j} 3 A \omega sin(\omega t)[/tex]
[tex]\vec{a} = -\hat{i} A \omega^2 cos(\omega t) - \hat{j} 9 A \omega^2 cos(\omega t})[/tex]

Where are the 3 and 9 coming from?

So, for part (b), this is where I'm wondering if I am correct:
[tex]F = -\frac{d U}{d t}[/tex]

The time derivative of potential energy doesn't even have units of force...Isn't Force the negative gradient of U?:wink:
 
Where are the 3 and 9 coming from?

Oops, I wrote the equation wrong. The original equation should be:

[tex]\vec{r} = \hat{i} A cos(\omega t) + \hat{j} A cos(3 \omega t)[/tex]

The time derivative of potential energy doesn't even have units of force...Isn't Force the negative gradient of U?:wink:

So how would you get the potential from the force? I don't see how you can reverse the gradient
 
Well, in Cartesian coords, the gradient of some scalar function [itex]f[/itex] is of course

[tex]\vec{\nabla}f=\frac{\partial f}{\partial x} \hat{i}+\frac{\partial f}{\partial y} \hat{j}+\frac{\partial f}{\partial z} \hat{k}[/tex]

So if I tell you that [tex]\vec{A}=A_x\hat{i}+A_y\hat{j}+A_z\hat{k}=-\vec{\nabla}f[/tex], what can you tell me about [itex]A_x[/itex], [itex]A_y[/itex] and [itex]A_z[/itex]?
 
gabbagabbahey said:
Well, in Cartesian coords, the gradient of some scalar function [itex]f[/itex] is of course

[tex]\vec{\nabla}f=\frac{\partial f}{\partial x} \hat{i}+\frac{\partial f}{\partial y} \hat{j}+\frac{\partial f}{\partial z} \hat{k}[/tex]

So if I tell you that [tex]\vec{A}=A_x\hat{i}+A_y\hat{j}+A_z\hat{k}=-\vec{\nabla}f[/tex], what can you tell me about [itex]A_x[/itex], [itex]A_y[/itex] and [itex]A_z[/itex]?

so...

[tex]A_x = -\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}[/tex]
[tex]A_y = -\frac{\partial f}{\partial y}[/tex]
[tex]A_z = -\frac{\partial f}{\partial z}[/tex]

If [tex]\vec{F} = -\vec{\nabla}U[/tex]
and [tex]\vec{\nabla}U=\frac{\partial U}{\partial x} \hat{i}+\frac{\partial U}{\partial y} \hat{j}+\frac{\partial U}{\partial z} \hat{k}[/tex]

I have

[tex]\vec{F} =- \vec{\nabla}U = m (-\hat{i} A \omega^2 cos(\omega t) - \hat{j} 9 A \omega^2 cos(3 \omega t})) = -\frac{\partial U}{\partial x} \hat{i}-\frac{\partial U}{\partial y} \hat{j}-\frac{\partial U}{\partial z} \hat{k}[/tex]

[tex]m A \omega^2 cos(\omega t) = \frac{\partial U}{\partial x}[/tex]
[tex]m 9 A \omega^2 cos(3 \omega t}) = \frac{\partial U}{\partial y}[/tex]
[tex]0 = \frac{\partial U}{\partial z} \hat{k}[/tex]

Would I integrate the left side with respect to x and y to get

[tex]m A \omega^2 cos(\omega t) x = U_x[/tex]
[tex]m 9 A \omega^2 cos(3 \omega t) y = U_y[/tex]

or just

[tex]U = m A \omega^2 cos(\omega t) x + m 9 A \omega^2 cos(3 \omega t) y[/tex]
 
csnsc14320 said:
[tex]m A \omega^2 cos(\omega t) = \frac{\partial U}{\partial x}[/tex]
[tex]m 9 A \omega^2 cos(3 \omega t}) = \frac{\partial U}{\partial y}[/tex]
[tex]0 = \frac{\partial U}{\partial z} \hat{k}[/tex]

Correct :approve:

[tex]U = m A \omega^2 cos(\omega t) x + m 9 A \omega^2 cos(3 \omega t) y[/tex]

There are two things you need to be careful of here:

(1) [itex]m A \omega^2 cos(\omega t)[/itex] is not necessarily independent of [itex]x(t)[/itex] and [itex]m 9 A \omega^2 cos(3 \omega t})[/itex] is not necessarily independent of [itex]y(t)[/itex]. So in order to integrate them properly, you need to determine their functional dependence on [itex]x[/itex] and [itex]y[/itex] first.

Hint: As always, [tex]\vec{r}(t)=x(t)\hat{i}+y(t)\hat{j}+z(t)\hat{k}[/tex] so compare that to the trajectory you were given and find out what [itex]x(t)[/itex] and [itex]y(t)[/itex] are.

(2)If I tell you that [tex]\frac{\partial f(x,y,z)}{\partial x}=g(x,y,z)[/tex] Then that means [tex]f(x,y,z)=\int g(x,y,z) dx + h(y,z)[/tex] where [itex]h(y,z)[/itex] is some unknown function of [itex]y[/itex] and [itex]z[/itex]. It does not just mean that [tex]f(x,y,z)=\int g(x,y,z) dx[/tex].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K