Is the Eigenvalue Equation Correct for 3D Small Oscillations?

neelakash
Messages
491
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Problem: Derive eigenvalue equation of motion of a system undergoing free small oscillation in three dimensional space.

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution



I want to know if I have correctly written the values of T and V---

\ T=\frac{1}{2}\ m [\dot{x}^2 +\dot{y}^2+ \dot{z}^2]

And \ V=\frac{1}{2}\ k[\ x^2+\ y^2+\ z^2]

I m not sure if I have written the write thing...what should be the sign of k.Should I write -ve?And is it OK to assume that the force constants are equal?What would be if they were not equal?Would they simply add like (1/2)(k1+k2) x^2?

If I can form T and V,I am confident that I will be able to do the rest of calculations.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It appears to me that the potential energy would be

\ V=\frac{1}{2}[\ k_1+k_2]\ x^2+...

From the elimentary knowledge, we know when a spring of natural length is compressed or elongated, workdone on the particle is -(1/2)kx^2. So,...(1/2)kx^2 amount of energy is stored within the spring as potential energy.So, V would be +ve.

Right?

So, we are to omit the factor of half in V in the first post. Please tell me if I am correct.
 
Last edited:
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