Cubic lattice, masses and springs, fire little mass at it.

AI Thread Summary
A cubic lattice of masses connected by springs can theoretically be subjected to a single mass fired at it, resulting in translational motion with minimal vibrational energy. The discussion explores whether it's possible to achieve this outcome without imparting significant vibrations to the lattice. A comparison is made to a one-dimensional lattice, where a gentle shove produces mostly translational movement, while a hard shove leads to both translational and vibrational energy. The inquiry draws parallels to the Mössbauer effect, seeking a classical system that allows for gamma emission without producing crystal phonons. Understanding these dynamics could provide insights into energy transfer in lattice systems.
Spinnor
Gold Member
Messages
2,227
Reaction score
419
Suppose I have a cubic lattice of N^3 masses, M, each connected to six nearest neighbors with springs of constant k free to move but at rest. Now fire a single mass, m, with velocity v at surface of the lattice such that no rotation can be imparted to the cubic lattice. Let the fired mass bounce off a single lattice mass so that both masses move in the opposite direction.

Can we fire a mass at a lattice at rest and only produce translation of lattice with no or little vibration of the lattice?

I wanted to understand if there was a classical system similar to the crystal in the Mössbauer effect where we can have gamma emission with no crystal phonons produced.

Thanks for any help!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think what I'm asking can be simplified with the following classical setup. Let there be a one dimensional lattice of N masses M, connected by springs with the whole system constrained to move on a line. Suppose we give the first mass of this system a slow gentle shove. I think the math would show that the lattice would move as a whole with very little vibrational energy being produced. But now suppose we give the first mass of the lattice a hard fast shove then it seems the math would also show that now the lattice would gain both translational and vibrational energy?
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top