Motion of a mass m confined to the x-axis (Hamiltonian)

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a mass m confined to the x-axis and subject to a force described by Fx=kx, where k is a positive constant. Participants are exploring the potential energy U(x) and the implications of different energy states (E>0 and E<0) on the motion of the mass.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to understand the relationship between potential energy and force, particularly how the sign of the force affects the potential energy function. Questions arise regarding the interpretation of negative energy and its implications for the motion of the mass.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants clarifying misunderstandings about the relationship between force and potential energy. Some guidance has been offered regarding the correct formulation of potential energy, but there remains a lack of consensus on the implications of energy being negative.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the constraints of the problem, specifically the requirement that k > 0 and the implications of this on the potential energy function. There is confusion about the signs associated with force and potential energy, which is central to the discussion.

jmm5872
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Consider a mass m confined to the x-axis and subject to a force Fx=kx where k>0.

Write down and sketch the potential energy U(x) and describe the possible motions of the mass. (Distinguish between the cases that E>0 and E<0.


It is the part in parenthesis that confuses me. I can't picture what a negative value of energy would be.

I know the potential is U(x) = (1/2)kx2, and that Total energy is kinetic plus potential (E = T + U). I also assume that the potential is always positive. If this is true, then the only was for the energy to be negative is to have the kinetic be negative and larger than the potential.

Does this refer to the case when the mass is moving in the -x direction giving T = -(1/2)mv2?

It seems to me that the motion should be the same whether the energy is negative or positive since this is a classical mass and confined to the parabolic potential well. It seems like it should oscillate back and forth for any energy.

For some reason I don't think I am picturing this correctly.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You've written down the potential for the force F = -kx, but your force doesn't have the negative sign. The potential should be U(x) = -1/2 kx2. Now E<0 should make sense to you.
 
The problem specifically states that k > 0, and F = kx, which gives U = 1/2 kx^2. I don't really understand what you are trying to say, or where the F = -kx that you wrote comes from.
 
I'm saying your belief that F=kx implies U = 1/2 kx2 is wrong. Look up how to find the potential from a force or vice versa.
 
Ah, okay, I understand now. I forgot that the potential is opposite the sign of force! Thank you!

F = -dU/dx
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
4K