Bead sliding on a rigid straight wire

Favicon
Messages
14
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A bead is free to slide along a rigid, straight wire, whilst the wire is rotating at angular velocity ω about the z-axis and is tilted away from the z-axis at angle α. I have the equation of motion (EOM) and need to find an explicit solution for the distance of the bead along the wire (q) as a function of time.

Homework Equations


EOM: \ddot{q} - ω^2sin^2(α)q = -gcos(α)

The Attempt at a Solution


I assume the ansatz

q = Ae^{Bt}

which differentiates twice to give

\ddot{q} = B^2q

and substitute the second expression into the EOM, which gives (after a little rearrangement):

q = -\frac{gcos(α)}{B^2 - ω^2sin^2(α)}

I don't know what I've done wrong, but I'm sure I must have made a mistake somewhere since the result is an expression for q which has no dependence on time, despite my ansatz that q is a function of time. Can anyone explain what I should do differently here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Favicon! :smile:
Favicon said:
EOM: \ddot{q} - ω^2sin^2(α)q = -gcos(α)

I assume the ansatz

q = Ae^{Bt}

which differentiates twice to give

\ddot{q} = B^2q

and substitute the second expression into the EOM, which gives (after a little rearrangement):

q = -\frac{gcos(α)}{B^2 - ω^2sin^2(α)}

no, it's AeBt = that

but wouldn't it be simpler to write \ddot{q} - ω^2sin^2(α)(q + gcos(α)/ω^2sin^2(α)), and make the obvious linear substitution? :wink:
 
tiny-tim said:
Hi Favicon! :smile:


no, it's AeBt = that

but wouldn't it be simpler to write \ddot{q} - ω^2sin^2(α)(q + gcos(α)/ω^2sin^2(α)), and make the obvious linear substitution? :wink:

Please bear with me as I'm quite rusty on my differential equation solving. By "the obvious linear substitution" I take it you mean p(t) = q(t) + \frac{gcos(\alpha)}{\omega^2sin^2(\alpha)}

Then, since \alpha and \omega are both constant, we have \ddot{p} = \ddot{q}

Substituting those into the EOM (in the form you suggested) gives

\ddot{p} - \omega^2sin^2(\alpha)p = 0

No I take the ansatz p = Ae^{Bt} and substitute into the previous equation to get

B^2Ae^{Bt} - \omega^2sin^2(\alpha)Ae^{Bt} = 0

B = ±\omega sin(\alpha)

If I remember rightly, this means a general solution takes the form

p(t) = A_1e^{\omega sin(\alpha)t} + A_2e^{-\omega sin(\alpha)t}

Substituting for q then yields

q(t) = A_1e^{\omega sin(\alpha)t} + A_2e^{-\omega sin(\alpha)t} - \frac{gcos(\alpha)}{\omega^2sin^2(\alpha)}

Am I right so far? I can see that to go any further would require knowledge of q(t) at some specific time, e.g q(0). However, the textbook from which I'm working suggests that to determine a specific solution for q(t) would require knowledge of \dot{q}(0) at some specific time also. Where does this requirement come from?
 
Favicon said:
If I remember rightly, this means a general solution takes the form

p(t) = A_1e^{\omega sin(\alpha)t} + A_2e^{-\omega sin(\alpha)t}

Substituting for q then yields

q(t) = A_1e^{\omega sin(\alpha)t} + A_2e^{-\omega sin(\alpha)t} - \frac{gcos(\alpha)}{\omega^2sin^2(\alpha)}

yes :smile:

now you have two constants of integration, A1 and A2, so you need two initial conditions to find both (which will usually be a condition on q and a condition on q')
 
Ah yes, that's a good point. Thanks very much for your help Tiny :)
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top