What is the difference between SHM and HM ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter linuxpie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Difference Shm
AI Thread Summary
Simple Harmonic Motion (SHM) refers specifically to motion that is purely sinusoidal, characterized by a restoring force proportional to displacement. In contrast, Harmonic Motion encompasses a broader category of periodic behaviors, which may include multiple frequencies and complex combinations of motions. While SHM is mathematically simple, represented by functions like x(t)=Acos(wt+φ), harmonic motion can involve more intricate patterns. The discussion highlights the importance of distinguishing between these terms, as they are often used interchangeably. Understanding these differences is crucial for accurately describing various physical systems.
linuxpie
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
What is the difference between Simple Harmonic Motion and Harmonic Motion ?
and How do we define the motion of a system is SHM ?

Thank you !
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Sometimes they are used interchangably. SHM is usually taken to mean purely sinusoidal behavior. "harmonic motion" could simply mean regularly repeating behavior, but could consist of multiple frequencies (fundamental, overtones, undertones, additional fundamental excitations, etc)
 
Welcome to PF!

linuxpie said:
What is the difference between Simple Harmonic Motion and Harmonic Motion ?

Hi linuxpie ! Welcome to PF! :smile:

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_harmonic_motion:
Complex harmonic motion occurs when a number of simple harmonic motions are combined.

Chords in music are an example of this phenomenon.
and How do we define the motion of a system is SHM ?

SHM is where the restoring force is proportional to the displacement (or look up wikipedia! :wink: ).
 
linuxpie said:
What is the difference between Simple Harmonic Motion and Harmonic Motion ?
and How do we define the motion of a system is SHM ?Thank you !
My understanding is that 'harmonic' is synonymous to periodic, and the 'simple' means that the displacement (from the origin) is a sinusodal function of time - i.e., a mathematically simple function. For example x(t)=Acos(wt+\phi), where A,w and \phi are constants. This is equivalent to the definition that tiny-tim gave above.
 
Thank you all !
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top