Derivatives and equilibrium position of a spring

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the equilibrium position of a spring, focusing on the use of potential energy functions and derivatives. Participants explore different methods for finding this position, including setting the potential energy to zero and taking derivatives, as well as the implications of arbitrary constants in potential energy definitions.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes determining the equilibrium point by setting the potential energy function U(r) to zero and solving for r, questioning the correctness of this method.
  • Another participant argues that potential energy is only unique up to a constant, suggesting that the choice of zero point can affect the outcome.
  • A participant expresses confusion about the relationship between potential and kinetic energy at the equilibrium position of a spring.
  • It is suggested that using derivatives is a more reliable method for finding equilibrium, as adding a constant does not affect the derivative.
  • One participant mentions that a derivative-free solution could involve setting the net force on the spring to zero, although this may be complex in dynamic situations.
  • There is a consensus among some participants that relying on the zero of the potential energy function may lead to incorrect conclusions due to the arbitrary nature of potential energy constants.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of using the potential energy function set to zero for finding equilibrium. While some acknowledge that it can yield correct results in simple cases, others argue that it is not a reliable method due to the arbitrary nature of potential energy constants. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to determine equilibrium.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of their methods, particularly the dependence on the choice of potential energy reference points and the complexity introduced by time-varying forces acting on the spring.

lonewolf219
Messages
186
Reaction score
2
I determined the equilibrium point of a spring by setting the potential energy function U(r) equal to zero and solving for r. But I just looked at the guided solution, and they took the derivative of U(r) first, then solved for r.

Is my approach correct? Can we solve for the equilibrium position of a spring without taking any derivatives?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hi lonewolf219! :smile:
lonewolf219 said:
I determined the equilibrium point of a spring by setting the potential energy function U(r) equal to zero and solving for r.

you must somehow have chosen your constant in such a way that that happened to work

potential energy is only unique up to a constant

eg with gravitational potential energy we often set it equal to 0 "at infinity", or at the level of the lab floor :wink:
 
Thanks Tiny Tim! But I thought that a spring has zero potential energy and maximum kinetic energy at the equilibrium position ? Am I wrong?
 
lonewolf219 said:
Is my approach correct? Can we solve for the equilibrium position of a spring without taking any derivatives?

Solving for the zero of the potential energy function is bogus, because you can always add an arbitrary constant to the potential energy without changing any physics. So if you got the right answer, you got lucky in your choice of zero point (which is pretty easy to do in a lot of simple systems). On the other hand, adding an arbitrary constant won't affect the derivative, so if you're going to use energy methods the derivative approach is always correct (which may be why they're teaching it to you).

If you want a derivative-free solution, you can set the net force on the end of the spring to zero, solve for the tension in the spring required to meet that condition. That can be very hard to do in the general case of time-varying forces acting on the spring, such as if there's a weight bouncing around on the end. For that problem, you'll likely find that minimizing the potential energy by looking for the zeroes of the first derivative is easiest.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Nugatory said:
Solving for the zero of the potential energy function is bogus …

bogus! that's the word i was looking for!

thanks, Nugatory :smile:
lonewolf219 said:
Thanks Tiny Tim! But I thought that a spring has zero potential energy and maximum kinetic energy at the equilibrium position ? Am I wrong?

it only has has zero potential energy at the equilibrium position if you define it that way …

and if you know enough about the equilibrium position in the first place, to define it that way, then why did you ever need to solve anything?

bogus! :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Okay, thanks guys. I noticed it worked for another problem but as Nugatory mentioned, it must be luck with simple systems
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K