How to show that a trajectory is closed?

  • Thread starter Thread starter guest1234
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Closed Trajectory
AI Thread Summary
A trajectory is considered closed if the motion is periodic, meaning the system returns to its initial state after a certain time. In the context of a pendulum in a rotating reference frame, the trajectory can still close even if the system's differential equations are asymmetrical, as long as the frequencies of the coordinates align appropriately. The condition that the trajectory fills densely an annulus suggests that if the angular velocity of the inertial frame is not comparable to the eigenfrequency of the rotating frame, the trajectory will not be closed. The discussion highlights the importance of irrational numbers in determining the periodicity of motion. Overall, the relationship between periodic motion and closed trajectories is affirmed, provided the system remains time-independent.
guest1234
Messages
38
Reaction score
1
Main question in the title.

I did a group work in analytic mechanics about pendulum in rotating reference frame and stumbled upon this one: http://peer.ccsd.cnrs.fr/docs/00/50/17/84/PDF/PEER_stage2_10.1016%252Fj.ijnonlinmec.2008.03.009.pdf. Does this always hold?

The trajectory is closed if and only if the motion is periodic.

In my solution, there are two coordinates with the same frequency (different amplitudes) but asymmetrical in general sense (diff equations that described system were asymmetrical). Will trajectory close regardless of asymmetry?

The "trajectory fills densely an annulus" condition (see next page) is quite enigmatic, too. The angular velocity of inertial reference frame must be in the same order of magnitude as eigenfrequency (hope it's right term for this) of rotating reference frame, otherwise period of precession is too small and trajectory fills a certain region on a plane of motion. I don't see any irrational numbers involved.

Also, I hope to see any references to literature that help to gain insight on questions like that.

edit: I guess that "trajectory fills an annulus" means the same as "trajectory is not closed", so it all boils down to that irrational number.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Motion is periodic <=> after some time t, the system returns to its initial state <=> trajectory is closed

They are equivalent, assuming the system itself is time-independent.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top