How to prove that motion is periodic but not simple harmonic?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving that the function x = sin(ωt) + sin(2ωt) + sin(4ωt) is periodic but not simple harmonic motion (SHM). Participants analyze the individual components, noting that while each term represents SHM, their sum does not satisfy the condition where acceleration is proportional to displacement (a = -ω²x). They emphasize the importance of plotting the function to visually confirm periodicity and to demonstrate that it does not resemble a sinusoidal wave. The consensus is that the motion is periodic with a period T = 2π/ω, but the combined function does not fit the criteria for SHM. Ultimately, the function's non-sinusoidal nature confirms it is periodic but not simple harmonic.
  • #51
TSny said:
@vcsharp2003
Your answer to @haruspex in post #40 is actually a good way to show that it's not SHM. Sorry that I did not see that sooner.
I put the second derivative in the following form.

##a= -\omega ^2 x -\omega ^2 (3 sin{(2\omega t)} + 15sin {(4\omega t)})##

Isn't that clearly saying ##a## is simply not ##a= -\omega ^2 x##. If it were SHM, then we would have got ##a= -\omega ^2 x##, but we didn't. To me that is so obvious. Based on the above fact, clearly it's not SHM.

No need of ultra-complex proofs and other logic.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #52
vcsharp2003 said:
I put the second derivative in the following form.

##a= -\omega ^2 x -\omega ^2 (3 sin{(2\omega t)} + 15sin {(4\omega t)})##

Isn't that clearly saying ##a## is simply not ##a= -\omega ^2 x##.
Yes, but as pointed out, you need to show there does not exist any constant, A, the given ##\omega## or otherwise, for which ##\ddot x=-A^2x##. Post #40 does that.
 
  • Like
Likes vcsharp2003
Back
Top