Normal coordinates (small oscillations)

In summary, your solution in double-checking V over T yielded the normal coordinates for the \omega = 0 mode, while Goldstein's solution found the coordinates of the center of mass. I don't think there is a dimensional error in Goldstein, but your solution does differ by \sqrt{m} .
  • #1
Chen
977
1
Hello,

I solved the problem of small oscillations for a 3-atom molecule, such as CO2, which is modeled as 3 masses connected by 2 springs. Both springs have a constant k, the outer masses are m and the middle one is M.

There are 3 modes of oscillations, and one of them is of course [tex]\omega[/tex] = 0, i.e it is a rigid translation of the molecule as a whole. I've also found the normal coordinates for each mode, and for this particular one I found:

[tex]Q = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2m+M}} (mq_1 + Mq_2 + mq_3)[/tex]

Where qi is the "real" coordinates of each molecule. This seems pretty logical, right? Because basically I foud that the normal coordinates for the [tex]\omega[/tex] = 0 mode is exactly the coordinate of the center of mass (after normalization).

However, the exact same problem was solved in Goldstein's "Classical mechanics" (3rd ed.), and a different normal coordinate was found there. It was:

[tex]Q = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2m+M}} (\sqrt{m}q_1 + \sqrt{M}q_2 + \sqrt{m}q_3)[/tex]

Which is not what I found, nor do I understand its meaning. My friend thinks that both answers are correct, and the difference is just in normalization; I don't agree, one of these answers must be wrong. I'd think that my answer is correct, but since the other one is taken for the book, I'm not so sure.

Can someone please clarify? Which answer seems more logical?

Thanks,
Chen
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Dimensionally speaking only one of those solutions can be correct. Yours differs by [itex] \sqrt {m} [/itex]. I doubt there is a dimensional error in Goldstein.

Double check your solution.

Actually it is clear that yours is incorrect.
 
  • #3
Well, suppose that in my solution I divide by (2m+M) and not its square root, so the dimensions are not a problem. It still makes more sense than the solution in Goldstein, no? Because it's the coordinate of the center of mass. So unless I don't understand the meaning of a normal coordinate, I'd think it looks pretty right.

I double- and triple- checked my solution many times. I diagonalized V (potential energy) over T (kinetic energy), and found that the diagonalizing matrix A, such that [tex]A^{-1}VA = I[/tex] is:

[tex]A = \left(\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2m+M}}&\frac{1}{\sqrt{2m}}&\frac{M}{\sqrt{2mM(2m+M)}}\\\frac{1}{\sqrt{2m+M}}&0&\frac{-2m}{\sqrt{2mM(2m+M)}}\\\frac{1}{\sqrt{2m+M}}&\frac{-1}{\sqrt{2m}}&\frac{M}{\sqrt{2mM(2m+M)}}\end{array}\right)[/tex]

Which is orthogonal over T, i.e [tex]A^tTA = I[/tex]. This is also the matrix that appears in Goldstein. Therefore, the normal coordinates are:

[tex]\vec{Q} = A^{-1}\vec{q} = A^tT\vec{q}[/tex]

Where T is the trivial matrix, with simply m, M, m on the diagonal.

Now you see how I came to my solution?

Integral said:
Actually it is clear that yours is incorrect.
I don't suppose you could explain why that is?

Thanks,
Chen
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Anyone?

Chen
 

1. What are normal coordinates in the context of small oscillations?

Normal coordinates refer to a set of coordinates used to describe the motion of a system undergoing small oscillations, where the motion is linear and the restoring forces are proportional to the displacement from equilibrium. These coordinates are chosen such that each coordinate corresponds to one independent mode of vibration.

2. How are normal coordinates related to the concept of normal modes?

Normal coordinates and normal modes are closely related concepts. Normal coordinates represent the coordinates of the system's motion, while normal modes represent the different patterns of vibration that the system can undergo. Each normal mode corresponds to one normal coordinate, and the equations of motion in normal coordinates are equivalent to the equations of motion for the normal modes.

3. How are normal coordinates different from Cartesian coordinates?

Normal coordinates are different from Cartesian coordinates in that they are specifically chosen to describe the motion of a system undergoing small oscillations. They take into account the nature of the forces and the equilibrium position of the system, while Cartesian coordinates do not. Normal coordinates also allow for a simpler and more intuitive representation of the system's motion, as each coordinate corresponds to one independent mode of vibration.

4. Can normal coordinates be used for systems with multiple degrees of freedom?

Yes, normal coordinates can be used for systems with multiple degrees of freedom. In this case, there will be multiple normal coordinates, each corresponding to one independent mode of vibration. The equations of motion in normal coordinates can also be extended to systems with multiple degrees of freedom, making it a powerful tool for analyzing complex systems.

5. How are normal coordinates calculated and used in practice?

The process of finding the normal coordinates for a system involves solving a set of simultaneous equations based on the forces acting on the system and its equilibrium position. Once the normal coordinates are determined, they can be used to simplify the equations of motion and make calculations easier. They are also useful for visualizing and understanding the behavior of the system, as each normal coordinate corresponds to a specific mode of vibration.

Similar threads

  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
3
Views
673
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
730
Back
Top