Hooke's Law on a microscopic level

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Hooke's Law describes the linear relationship between the force required to stretch or compress a spring and the distance stretched. At the microscopic level, this relationship is influenced by the balance of attractive and repulsive forces between particles, which obey an inverse-square law. As particles are displaced, the potential energy can be approximated using a Taylor expansion, revealing that the second derivative of potential energy governs the restoring force. The equilibrium distance between particles is maintained by the interplay of these forces, with repulsive forces decreasing more rapidly than attractive forces as distance increases, leading to a net attraction towards equilibrium.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Hooke's Law and its limitations
  • Familiarity with potential energy and its derivatives
  • Knowledge of atomic interactions, including Van der Waals and ionic bonds
  • Basic principles of quantum mechanics related to particle interactions
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the implications of Hooke's Law in materials science
  • Study the potential energy functions in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the behavior of Van der Waals forces in different materials
  • Learn about the role of repulsive forces in atomic interactions
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, materials scientists, and students studying mechanics and atomic interactions will benefit from this discussion, particularly those interested in the microscopic foundations of material properties and forces.

BrainSalad
Messages
53
Reaction score
1
Hooke's law states that the force required to stretch/compress a spring is proportional to the distance stretched. Meanwhile, electromagnetic interactions between particles obey an inverse-square law with respect to distance. So, if as a spring is stretched, it's composite particles get farther apart from each other, why does the force required to stretch it increase?

I know that Hooke's law is only an approximation, but it works quite well. What goes on at the microscopic level which keeps the increased distance between particles from reducing the attractive force between them? If there is a quantum mechanical answer which reveals something special about chemical bonds, I can accept that I am too ignorant of that field to understand the answer as of yet.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The deal is that in small distances, the hook's law appears.
If for examply you have two particles interacting in a distance a, and you make a small displacement r you'll get for the potential:
V(r+a)= V(a)+ r ( \frac{∂V}{∂r} )_{r=a} + \frac{r^{2}}{2} (\frac{∂^{2}V}{∂r^{2}})_{r=a}+O(r^{3})
Now if at your initial distance everything was stable, V(a) is just a constant, the (\frac{∂V}{∂r})_{r=a}=0 because it was a stable that point, and you only have the 2nd derivative term...

V(r+a)= V(a)+ \frac{r^{2}}{2} (\frac{∂^{2}V}{∂r^{2}})_{r=a}+O(r^{3})
So everything, no matter what kind of force you have, at small displacements works like the Hook's law (harmonic oscillator): the potential has the r^{2} dependence.
 
Last edited:
This doesn't explain the fact that a larger force is required to keep a spring stretched at greater length, does it? Two particles attracted to each other are still easier to pull apart when they are far away from each other, but a spring is opposite that.
 
But in the string the particle of the one edge does not interact with the particle on the other edge... each is interacting with their neighbors in the way I explained.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
The attractive force is not the only force acting on the particles.
You cannot have an equilibrium with attraction only.
If the atoms get too close to each other there is a repulsion force.
The equilibrium distance between particles is given by the balance of the attraction and repulsion.
If you stretch the crystal, the distance between particles increases and both attraction and repulsion force decreases. But the repulsion decreases much faster with distance so the net effect is an attraction towards the equilibrium position.

See. for example. Van der Waals or ionic crystals, for specific examples of how the forces depend on distance.
http://physics.unl.edu/tsymbal/teaching/SSP-927/Section 03_Crystal_Binding.pdf
 
Last edited:
nasu said:
The attractive force is not the only force acting on the particles.
You cannot have an equilibrium with attraction only.
If the atoms get too close to each other there is a repulsion force.
The equilibrium distance between particles is given by the balance of the attraction and repulsion.
If you stretch the crystal, the distance between particles increases and bot attraction an d repulsion forces decreases. But the repulsion decreases much faster with distance so the net effect is an attraction towards the equilibrium position.

See. for example. Van der Waals or ionic crystals, for specific examples of how the forces depend on distance.
http://physics.unl.edu/tsymbal/teaching/SSP-927/Section 03_Crystal_Binding.pdf

Yes. Each particles sits in a 'potential well' and the restoring force for small perturbations (together or apart) is proportional to the displacement. Billions of atoms (in line), each one moving by minute distances,means that the restoring force is linear with overall large distortion of the bulk metal.
 
nasu said:
The attractive force is not the only force acting on the particles.
You cannot have an equilibrium with attraction only.
If the atoms get too close to each other there is a repulsion force.
The equilibrium distance between particles is given by the balance of the attraction and repulsion.
If you stretch the crystal, the distance between particles increases and both attraction and repulsion force decreases. But the repulsion decreases much faster with distance so the net effect is an attraction towards the equilibrium position.

This makes good sense.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K