Is Power Balance a Valid Criterion for Oscillating System Stability?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the validity of defining stability in oscillating systems based on power balance, specifically comparing absorbed and emitted power. It argues that a system emitting more power than it absorbs may be considered "active" rather than stable, using examples like gas tanks and passive materials. Stability is better defined by the constancy of a system's centroid, such as the center of mass in orbiting bodies or equilibrium points in oscillating systems. The conversation emphasizes that oscillating systems, like a mass on a spring, remain stable unless structural failure occurs, despite potential erratic behavior due to frequency mismatches. Overall, the definition of stability should focus on equilibrium rather than power dynamics alone.
micopl
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Lets consider this definition: If the average power supplied to the system (absorbed power) is less than the average power lost by the system (emitted power) then the system is stable (during the time in which the power was averaged). Is such a definition of stability valid?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What kind of system do you have in mind? An exploding gas tank emits more power than it it absorbs, but I would not consider it stable. When you say a system emits more power than absorbs, that word that comes to mind is "active" (as opposed to passive), not "stable". For instance, if you shine a seed laser on a slab of rubber, it is passive and absorbs the energy. This is a passive material. If you shine a seed laser at a properly prepared tank of gas, it will amplify the signal. This is an active material.

Stability is better defined as a centroid of some sort of the system staying constant, such as the combined center of mass of two orbiting masses, or the equilibrium point of an oscillating mass. Stability typically happens in potential wells, whereas unstable equilibrium happens on potential peaks of potential saddle points.
 
I mean oscillating system which can be e.g. a mass connected to a spring, and the other end of the spring is forced with an oscillating force.
 
I don't think such a system could be called unstable for any type case, unless the spring breaks. You could get erratic behavior, if the driving force oscillated slightly faster or slower than a natural frequency, but I would still consider it stable.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top