Forced Oscillation with complex numbers

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving a physics problem involving forced oscillation using complex numbers. The equation m \ddot{z} = -k z + Fe^{i \omega t} is derived from applying a force to a mass-spring system. Participants clarify that only the real part of the equation has physical significance, while the imaginary part can be disregarded. One contributor emphasizes that not every complex solution z satisfies the equation, highlighting the distinction between real and imaginary components. The key takeaway is that the physical interpretation relies solely on the real part of the derived equation.
namesis
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


If a force F = F_0 cos (\omega t) = \Re{\{F_0 e^{i \omega t}\}} is applied to a body of mass m attached to a spring of constant k, and x = \Re\{z\}. Show that the following equation holds:
m \ddot{z} = - k z + Fe^{i \omega t} .

Homework Equations


Newton's second law.

The Attempt at a Solution


I tried to solve the problem assuming that z = x + y i with x and y being real numbers and show that the real parts of the two sides of the equation are equal and so are the imaginary parts. However, although for the real parts we just get Newton's second law, I could not anything useful by the imaginary parts.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello Namesis, :welcome:

Don't you get Newton's law for the imaginary part as well ?
 
namesis said:

Homework Statement


If a force F = F_0 cos (\omega t) = \Re{\{F_0 e^{i \omega t}\}} is applied to a body of mass m attached to a spring of constant k, and x = \Re\{z\}. Show that the following equation holds:
m \ddot{z} = - k z + Fe^{i \omega t} .

Homework Equations


Newton's second law.

The Attempt at a Solution


I tried to solve the problem assuming that z = x + y i with x and y being real numbers and show that the real parts of the two sides of the equation are equal and so are the imaginary parts. However, although for the real parts we just get Newton's second law, I could not anything useful by the imaginary parts.
The key point is that only the real part has physical meaning, you may ignore completely the imaginary part. The physical equation is the real part of ##m \ddot{z} = - k z + Fe^{i \omega t} ##, the imaginary part can simply be discarded, it has no meaning (as is clear from the fact that the y you introduced in ##z= x + i y ## has not been assigned any physical meaning.
 
nrqed said:
The key point is that only the real part has physical meaning, you may ignore completely the imaginary part. The physical equation is the real part of ##m \ddot{z} = - k z + Fe^{i \omega t} ##, the imaginary part can simply be discarded, it has no meaning (as is clear from the fact that the y you introduced in ##z= x + i y ## has not been assigned any physical meaning.

I see now. My point was that you can perfectly write x as x + 2342 i \in \mathbb{Z} without that obeying the equation. So every z that is a solution of the equation, has the property x = \Re{\{z\}} but not every z with the previous property satisfies the equation. The problem was stated in a way that it implied that what I had to show is: "Show that x = \Re{\{z\}} if and only if z satisfies the equation."
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top