Complex exponential description of SHM

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around deriving the equation for a standing wave from a second-order ODE, specifically transitioning from the sinusoidal function x = A sin(ωt) to the complex exponential form exp(±iωt). The key point is that the coefficients in the exponential form can be complex, allowing for a representation that includes both sine and cosine components. The general equation for simple harmonic motion (SHM) is x = A sin(ωt) + B cos(ωt), with the possibility of setting B to zero for simplification. Ultimately, the relationship between the complex exponential and the sine function is clarified by noting that the real part of the complex expression corresponds to the sine function. Understanding these connections is crucial for grasping the compatibility of these mathematical representations.
savvvvvvvvvvy
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hey,

I'm currently reading a textbook which is attempting to derive the equation for a standing wave from first principles. I understand most steps with the exception of one.

It derives a sinusoidal function {x = A \sin \omega t} from a second order ODE, but then immediately interchanges this to {exp{\pm i \omega t}}. Presumably the \pm indicates that there are two solutions, both of which may take the {cos \theta \pm i sin \theta} form from Euler's formula.

My question is how is this format compatible with a single sinusoidal function {x = A \sin \omega t}. No matter how I manipulate it, I always end up with the sum of a sine and cosine, and the sine generally comes out to be imaginary. I imagine there's some simple feature that I'm overlooking, but can't really see it at the moment. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
welcome to pf!

hey savvvvvvvvvvy! welllllllllcome to pf! :smile:

(use #s :wink:)
savvvvvvvvvvy said:
… how is this format compatible with a single sinusoidal function ##{x = A \sin \omega t}##. No matter how I manipulate it, I always end up with the sum of a sine and cosine, and the sine generally comes out to be imaginary.

difficult to tell without seeing the book,

but i'll guess that the coefficients of eiωt are allowed to be imaginary (or complex)
 
Remember that the general equatinn for SHM is ##x = A \sin \omega t + B \cos \omega t##. There must be some reason why your book choose to set ##B = 0##.

If you have an expression like ##x = C_1e^{i\omega t} + C_2 e^{-i\omega t}##, the constants ##C_1## and ##C_2## are complex numbers. To be precise, it should be written ##x = \Re(C_1e^{i\omega t} + C_2 e^{-i\omega t})## where ##\Re## means "the real part of".

To make the complex number form the same as the sine function, ##-i e^{i\omega t} + ie^{-i\omega t} = 2 \sin \omega t##.
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top