How do we prove Simple Harmonic Oscillation in a hanging spring?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter EBBAzores
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spring
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the existence of Simple Harmonic Oscillation (SHO) in a system involving a spring hanging from the ceiling. Participants explore the role of gravitational force in the equations governing the motion and seek to demonstrate the formula for the period of oscillation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the relevance of gravitational force (g) in proving SHO, suggesting that it complicates the differential equation.
  • Another participant proposes a change of variables to simplify the equation, indicating that g can be accounted for without affecting the SHO nature of the system.
  • Several participants discuss the derivation of the period of oscillation, with one expressing confusion about how to demonstrate the period formula T=2π√(m/K).
  • Another participant suggests that solving the differential equation is necessary to find the period, prompting further exploration of the solutions to the equation.
  • One participant attempts to derive the period by manipulating the differential equation but expresses uncertainty about their approach.
  • A later reply emphasizes the importance of recognizing the general solution to the SHO equation and correctly identifies the relationship between angular frequency and the spring constant.
  • Finally, a participant successfully derives the period formula, concluding that T=2π√(m/K) after confirming the relationship between angular frequency and the spring constant.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying degrees of understanding regarding the role of gravitational force and the derivation of the period formula. While some agree on the necessity of solving the differential equation, others remain uncertain about the steps involved. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the initial relevance of g in the context of proving SHO.

Contextual Notes

Participants rely on assumptions about the definitions of variables and the nature of the forces involved. The discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and varying interpretations of the differential equation.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in the mathematical foundations of oscillatory motion, particularly in the context of springs and gravitational forces, may find this discussion relevant.

EBBAzores
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
I have a question that's being bugging me around. This might be simple but I can't figure it out. If there's a spring hanging from the ceiling and we want to prove that there's a Simple Harmonic Oscilation then why don't we account for the gravitational force?

The sum of forces equals to mass times aceleration (ma) according to Newton's 2nd law, so the sum of forces is the gravitational force plus the force by the spring (there should be vectors above the forces of course).

This is a differential equation since aceleration equals the second derivative of position and to prove that there is a S.H.O. the equation must be
(d2x)/(dt2) + (K/m)x = 0

But in fact what I actually get is
(d2x)/(dt2) + (K/m)x + g = 0

I know that in this equation g is a constant but my question is is g relevant if we want to prove that there is a S.H.O?

And following that could anybody tell me how do we demonstrate that the period is in fact
T=2π√(m/K)

Thanks for your time
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

Hi EBBAzores! Welcome to PF! :smile:

(have a pi: π and a square-root: √ and try using the X2 button just above the Reply box :wink:)
EBBAzores said:
(d^2x)/(dt^2) + (K/m)x + g = 0

Hint: put y = x + gm/K :wink:
 
Just do a change of variables with x=X-gm/k

tiny-tim got me!
 
Ok one problem down, so i'll assume that g isn't relevant since I change variables for the S.H.O. but now how do we prove that the period is in fact the above one?

P.S.
Thanks for welcoming me in here =)
 
EBBAzores said:
… how do we prove that the period is in fact the above one?

uhh?

solve the equation! :smile:
 
I've solved it. Now I get the actual S.H.O. equation which is now
(d2y)/(dt2) + (K/m)y = 0

That part I understood but now I want to know why the period of oscillation is T=2π√(m/k)
how do we demonstrate that?

I can't figure it out sorry for wasting your time with this, maybe I'm really tired and that's why I can't figure it out :smile:
 
EBBAzores said:
I've solved it. Now I get the actual S.H.O. equation which is now
(d2y)/(dt2) + (K/m)y = 0

ok, so y'' = -(K/m)y …

the solutions are … ? :smile:
 
This might be a REALLY wild guess but where it goes xD

(d2y)/(dt2) = -(K/m)y

so that meand that

dt2 =(d2)y/(-k/m)y the y's disappear so I'll assume now that dt is an aproximation to the period T and that the minus sign before k doesn't really interest us so we'll exclude it therefore

T2=(d2)/(k/m) and now

T=1/√(k/m) and to put it in angular references T=2π/√(k/m)

I don't know if this is right our am I getting dumber xp problaby I need some sleep
 
(you're confusing the X2 button with the X2 button :wink:)
EBBAzores said:
(d2y)/(dt2) = -(K/m)y

so that meand that

dt2 =(d2)y/(-k/m)y the y's dissapear

no they don't disappear!

you can't possibly do that!
I don't know if this is right our am I getting dumber xp problaby I need some sleep

yes, get some sleep :zzz:

(then think about what solutions of shm you know)
 
  • #10
You have been told repeatedly "solve the equation" but have not. Do you not know the general solution to y''= ay?
 
  • #11
Ok so here I am again ready to finish it already.

Since we know that y=Acos(ωt+[itex]\phi[/itex]) so (d2y)/(dt2)=-Aω2cos(ωt+[itex]\phi[/itex]) we can easily get that

-Aω2cos(ωt+[itex]\phi[/itex])= -(k/m)(Acos(ωt+[itex]\phi[/itex]))

from that expression we obtain that ω2=k/m concluding that ω=√(k/m)

we also know that T=2π/ω=2π√(m/k)

I think that this time its really finished! :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K