Lagrangians and Masses with springs

AI Thread Summary
Two equal masses connected by a spring with spring constant k have a kinetic energy represented by 1/2*m*x1dot^2 + 1/2*m*x2dot^2, where x1 and x2 are their positions and x1dot and x2dot are their velocities. The potential energy is debated, with one perspective suggesting it should be 1/2*k*(x2-x1-L)^2, accounting for the spring's natural length L. However, the book simplifies this to 1/2*k*(x2-x1)^2, measuring positions from different reference points. It is noted that measuring both positions from the same point yields the same results, albeit with a constant offset of L. Exploring both methods can clarify the relationship between the two approaches.
ThereIam
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Okay, so two equal masses are connected by spring with spring constant k. The kinetic energy is obviously 1/2*m*x1dot^2 +1/2*m*x2dot^2. Please excuse my notation. x1 and x2 are the positions, x1dot and x2dot are the velocities. L is the length of the spring when not stretched.

So anyway, the potential energy ought to be 1/2*k*(x2-x1-L)^2, I would figure, because when x2-x1 = L, the spring would be unstretched and would store no potential energy. However, my book does not include the -L, and just gives 1/2*k*(x2-x1)^2 as the potential energy. Can anybody explain this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Often you don't measure every position from one common reference point, you measure them from the initial or undisplaced position of the system.

The book is measuring x1 from the initial position of one end of the spring, and x2 from the initial position of the other end.

Measuring both x1 and x2 from the same point will give you the same results (except for a constant offset of L) but the math will be messier. Do the problem both ways, to see how it works out.
 
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