Inserted mass on a rotating ring, problem with solution interpretation

albandres
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Its about a system like in picture. I have it solved alredy BUT I still have a problem
After getting the dynamic equation by Newtonian and Lagrangian methods I solved one of them making the hipótesis of Little oscillations. This diferential equation has three solutions depending on ω.

http://www.acienciasgalilei.com/public/forobb/galeria/tmp4/a44be89a0d.png

Homework Equations



The problem is that one of them is: θ=θocosh(Ωt) but when we increase t, θ grows exponetially till the infinite! How can this be posible if this is a solution only suitable for small oscillations?

Thanks!

PD: sorry about my english (Im spanish, and I am very tired now)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
ola albandres! welcome to pf! :smile:
albandres said:
Its about a system like in picture.

The problem is that one of them is: θ=θocosh(Ωt) but when we increase t, θ grows exponetially till the infinite! How can this be posible if this is a solution only suitable for small oscillations?

erm :redface:

no picture! :biggrin:

it's difficult to say without knowing the set-up, but does this solution represent an unstable equilibrium?
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top