Does the derivation of the SHM formula require calculus?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around deriving simple harmonic motion (SHM) from concepts of circular motion. It is noted that while SHM can be approached using algebra and trigonometry, a more rigorous derivation involves calculus, specifically through the application of Newton's second law (F=ma). The relationship between circular motion and SHM is highlighted, with the x-position of a mass in uniform circular motion mirroring the behavior of a harmonic oscillator. Participants emphasize that the x-component of centripetal force is proportional to displacement, reinforcing the connection between these two concepts. Overall, the conversation underscores the importance of calculus in providing a comprehensive understanding of SHM.
Elbobo
Messages
145
Reaction score
0
It's not a homework question, but I wanted to attempt to derive it on my own. I was lookin for some clues online, and I believe I saw a website using derivatives.

Can it be done using pure algebra and trigonometry?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are a number of equations that apply to simple harmonic motion. Which one are you thinking of? And what do you want to derive it from?
 
yes,shm is equivalent to the projection of circular motion
 
Yes and no.

The "real" way, in my mind, does require calculus. I consider it the real way because it comes directly from F=ma. The calculus isn't that tough, though, its a pretty simple differential equation that says that m x == m x''.

What kof refers to is this:

http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/8670/demodt0.gif

If you were to follow the path of a mass tracing out uniform circular motion, then the projection of the mass's x position would mimic that of a harmonic oscillator on the end of a spring.

Describing the position of the mass in terms of theta, then you can see that the harmonic oscillator equation works.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
yeah,that's what i mean,in circular motion with constant speed,you can prove the x-component of centripetal force is proportional to the displacement along x-axis,with an opposite direction,i derived shm this way before i learned calculus
 
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