How to find the stability of equibrium points

In summary: Your lecturer had this to say (see attachment)would you say i have interpreted his notes properly?Yes.
  • #1
cloud360
212
0

Homework Statement



I want to know if i got answer to C correct
[PLAIN]http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/7804/equilbrium.gif

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


[PLAIN]http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/508/equilbriumsol.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I am thinking it is more simple then i think.

Do we just sub values into V’, whatever gives V’=0 is stable. So x=1 and x=2 are stable?
 
  • #3
You are mostly on the right track, but you have a couple of errors.

The critical points are at x = 1 and x = 2 (correct).
V''(x) = (4 - 3x)/x3, which is correct and is what you have. However, you have (4 - 3x)/x3 --> 4 - 3x. The two expressions aren't equal, and V''(x) [itex]\neq[/itex] 4 - 3x. I don't understand the significance of the arrow, -->. You should remove it and the 4 - 3x expression. That's one of the errors I referred to.

The second error is that you calculated V''(x) using 4 - 3x, not (4 - 3x)/x3, which is equal to 4/x3 - 3/x2. You have V''(1) = 1 (correct) and V''(2) = -2 (incorrect). V''(2) = 4/8 - 3/4 = 1/2 - 3/4 = -1/4. Your calculation for V''(1) would have been incorrect if x had been any value other than 1.
 
  • #4
Mark44 said:
You are mostly on the right track, but you have a couple of errors.

The critical points are at x = 1 and x = 2 (correct).
V''(x) = (4 - 3x)/x3, which is correct and is what you have. However, you have (4 - 3x)/x3 --> 4 - 3x. The two expressions aren't equal, and V''(x) [itex]\neq[/itex] 4 - 3x. I don't understand the significance of the arrow, -->. You should remove it and the 4 - 3x expression. That's one of the errors I referred to.

The second error is that you calculated V''(x) using 4 - 3x, not (4 - 3x)/x3, which is equal to 4/x3 - 3/x2. You have V''(1) = 1 (correct) and V''(2) = -2 (incorrect). V''(2) = 4/8 - 3/4 = 1/2 - 3/4 = -1/4. Your calculation for V''(1) would have been incorrect if x had been any value other than 1.

Hi, thanks again for your reply.

So was i right to assume that V''(x)<0 ,means that point x is unstable, and

V''(x)L>0, means point x is stable?

or am i wrong here. i am not sure if a stable point is just when V'(x)=0? or whether it is what i said above?
 
  • #5
cloud360 said:
Hi, thanks again for your reply.

So was i right to assume that V''(x)<0 ,means that point x is unstable, and

V''(x)L>0, means point x is stable?
Truthfully, I don't know, but how you have it seems reasonable to me. If V''(x) < 0, the graph of V(x) is concave down, and the particle is at a local maximum point for potential energy. The particle could go left or right to get to places with lower potential energy.

On the other hand, if V''(x) > 0, the graph of V(x) is concave up, the the particle is at a local minimum point for potential energy. Whether the particle goes left or right, it "wants" to get back to the point of minimum potential energy.

I could be wrong, but that's how it seems to me.

Your textbook should have an explanation of how to determine whether a critical point of V(x) is stable or unstable.
cloud360 said:
or am i wrong here. i am not sure if a stable point is just when V'(x)=0? or whether it is what i said above?
 
  • #6
Mark44 said:
Truthfully, I don't know, but how you have it seems reasonable to me. If V''(x) < 0, the graph of V(x) is concave down, and the particle is at a local maximum point for potential energy. The particle could go left or right to get to places with lower potential energy.

On the other hand, if V''(x) > 0, the graph of V(x) is concave up, the the particle is at a local minimum point for potential energy. Whether the particle goes left or right, it "wants" to get back to the point of minimum potential energy.

I could be wrong, but that's how it seems to me.

Your textbook should have an explanation of how to determine whether a critical point of V(x) is stable or unstable.

my lecturer had this to say (see attachment)

would you say i have interpreted his notes properly?
 

Attachments

  • stability.gif
    stability.gif
    36.2 KB · Views: 464
  • #7
Yes.

You should also change the "circular imaginary function" part. It's the roots of the characteristic equation that are imaginary, which give rise to the circular functions sine and cosine. The functions themselves are not imaginary.
 
Last edited:
  • #8
Mark44 said:
No. Aside from what your lecturer is talking about characteristic equations (I don't know what they are for this problem), he's saying that V''(xe) < 0 ==> xe is stable, and that V''(xe) > 0 ==> xe is unstable. That's the opposite of what you said and what I thought.

You should also change the "circular imaginary function" part. It's the roots of the characteristic equation that are imaginary, which give rise to the circular functions sine and cosine. The functions themselves are not imaginary.

I am pretty sure he is saying if V''(x)<0 its unstable. that's what i said, can you please check again, kindly. as now i am worried :(
 
  • #9
I have attached his entire notes, please see pg11, it has the stuff about equilibrium points. as i am not convinced that my statements are exact opposite of my lecturers
 

Attachments

  • Chapter2.pdf
    141.5 KB · Views: 300
  • #10
cloud360 said:
I am pretty sure he is saying if V''(x)<0 its unstable. that's what i said, can you please check again, kindly. as now i am worried :(
Sorry, what you had was correct. I guess my brain stopped working momentarily. If V''(x) > 0, you get stablity, and if V''(x) < 0, you get instability, which is what I surmised earlier (post #5).

Also, now I see where the characteristic equation is coming from.
 

What is the definition of equilibrium point stability?

Equilibrium point stability refers to the tendency of a system to return to a steady state after being disturbed. In other words, if the system is in equilibrium, any small perturbation will not cause it to move significantly from the equilibrium state.

How do you determine the stability of an equilibrium point?

The stability of an equilibrium point can be determined by analyzing the behavior of the system around the equilibrium point. This can be done through techniques such as linearization, phase plane analysis, or Lyapunov stability analysis.

What is linearization and how is it used to find equilibrium point stability?

Linearization is a technique used to approximate the behavior of a nonlinear system around a specific point. This allows us to analyze the stability of the equilibrium point by converting it into a linear system, which is easier to analyze using mathematical tools.

How does phase plane analysis help in determining equilibrium point stability?

Phase plane analysis is a graphical method used to visualize the behavior of a system in two dimensions. By plotting the derivatives of the system's variables on a phase plane, we can determine the stability of the equilibrium points by looking at the direction of trajectories around the point.

What is Lyapunov stability analysis and how does it differ from other methods?

Lyapunov stability analysis is a method that uses a scalar function, known as the Lyapunov function, to determine the stability of an equilibrium point. Unlike other methods, it not only determines whether an equilibrium point is stable or unstable, but also provides information about the system's behavior around the equilibrium point.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
12K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
15
Views
3K
Back
Top