Oscillators and conservation of energy

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the derivation and interpretation of the equation v0=√(C/M)*x related to spring oscillators. Participants seek clarification on the terms in the equation and the total energy composition of a simple spring oscillator. There is confusion regarding the integration process and the relationship between kinetic and potential energy in the context of oscillation. Misunderstandings about the definitions and equations from the textbook are addressed, leading to a clearer understanding of energy conservation principles. Ultimately, the discussion highlights the complexities of spring oscillator dynamics and the importance of precise mathematical representation.
velvetmist
Messages
15
Reaction score
1
In the equation 7.4, the author is taking v0=√(C/M)*x, and I don't get where does that come from. I would really appreciatte your help, thanks.
 

Attachments

  • 3548646.JPG
    3548646.JPG
    9.5 KB · Views: 419
  • 651516584.JPG
    651516584.JPG
    18 KB · Views: 446
Physics news on Phys.org
Could you please define the terms in the equation you posted? This is for a spring oscillator, right? Thanks.

Can you say what you think is being expressed with this equation? What is the total energy of a simple spring oscillator made up of?
 
velvetmist said:
In the equation 7.4, the author is taking v0=√(C/M)*x
And you posted equation 7.5.
 
berkeman said:
And you posted equation 7.5.
Sorry, I made a typo, I posted the correct one.

berkeman said:
What is the total energy of a simple spring oscillator made up of?
Yes.

berkeman said:
This is for a spring oscillator, right?
Yes.

berkeman said:
Could you please define the terms in the equation you posted?
It doesn't say much, cause it's trying to explain spring oscillators in a general way.
 

Attachments

  • 1.JPG
    1.JPG
    19.1 KB · Views: 427
  • 2.JPG
    2.JPG
    20.9 KB · Views: 441
  • 3.JPG
    3.JPG
    15.5 KB · Views: 437
velvetmist said:
v0=√(C/M)*x

Maybe I missed it, but I don't see this in any of the stuff you posted.
 
George Jones said:
Maybe I missed it, but I don't see this in any of the stuff you posted.
If you do the integral you got:
56.JPG
. Then -M*v02=C*x2. So v0=√(-C/M)*x.

Edit: i just realized i forgot to put the minus.
 

Attachments

  • 56.JPG
    56.JPG
    1.6 KB · Views: 397
  • 56.JPG
    56.JPG
    1.6 KB · Views: 689
Last edited:
velvetmist said:
If you do the integral you got: View attachment 231123. Then -M*v02=C*x2. So v0=√(-C/M)*x.

Edit: i just realized i forgot to put the minus.
If you are going to post typeset equations, it would be worthwhile to learn a little LaTeX. Info => HowTo => https://www.physicsforums.com/help/latexhelp/

For example, $$\frac 1 2 Mv^2 - \frac 1 2 Mv_0^2$$
 
jbriggs444 said:
If you are going to post typeset equations, it would be worthwhile to learn a little LaTeX. Info => HowTo => https://www.physicsforums.com/help/latexhelp/

For example, $$\frac 1 2 Mv^2 - \frac 1 2 Mv_0^2$$

velvetmist said:
If you do the integral you got:
214204-13e95b0f6e34e0b7da0f6a7bf3dd9a7d.jpg
. Then -M*v02=C*x2. So v0=√(-C/M)*x.

$$ -M v^2_0 = C x^2 .$$ Therefore $$ v_0 = \sqrt {\frac {-C} {M}} x .$$

Btw, the text defines ##w_0 = \sqrt {\frac {C} {M}}, v_0 = w_0 A \cos(\phi). ## Then if ##v_0 = \sqrt {\frac {-C} {M}} x, x = A \cos(\phi). ## But we got that ## x = A \sin(\phi),## so ##\cos(\phi)## would be equal to ##\sin(\phi)## and that's not true. And even if it were true, I'm not taking into account that ##w_0 = \sqrt {\frac {C} {M}},## and not equal to ##\sqrt {\frac {-C} {M}}.##
 

Attachments

  • 214204-13e95b0f6e34e0b7da0f6a7bf3dd9a7d.jpg
    214204-13e95b0f6e34e0b7da0f6a7bf3dd9a7d.jpg
    730 bytes · Views: 497
Okay, now that I have figured out that I have a copy of the text (used in the first mechanics course I took all those decades ago), maybe we can have a discussion.

I don't understand what you mean when you write

velvetmist said:
If you do the integral you got ##\frac{1}{2} Mv^2 - \frac{1}{2} Mv_0^2 =##.

Do what integral? Also, this only half of an equation!

velvetmist said:
Then ##-M v^2_0 = C x^2##

I don't see how you got this.

Equation (7.5) in the text is
$$\frac{1}{2} Mv^2 + \frac{1}{2} Cx^2 = \frac{1}{2} M \left( \frac{dx}{dt} \right)^2 + \frac{1}{2} Cx^2 = E,$$
where ##E## is the constant ##\frac{1}{2} CA^2##. Here, ##C## is the spring constant and ##A## is the amplitude of oscillation..

This means that
$$\frac{1}{2} Mv^2 + \frac{1}{2} Cx^2 = \frac{1}{2} CA^2$$
at all times ##t##. Setting ##t=0## gives
$$\frac{1}{2} Mv_0^2 + \frac{1}{2} Cx_0^2 = \frac{1}{2} CA^2,$$
so that
$$v_0^2 = \frac{C}{M} \left( A^2 - x_0^2 \right) = \omega_0^2 \left( A^2 - x_0^2 \right).$$

Also, I do not understand

velvetmist said:
But we got that ## x = A \sin(\phi)##

Actually, ##x = A \sin \left( \omega_0 t + \phi \right)##.
 
  • #10
George Jones said:
Do what integral? Also, this only half of an equation!
(5.12) integral. And yes, i just realized that I cropted it in a wrong way, but basically: $$\Delta T = \frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Mv_0^2.$$

George Jones said:
I don't see how you got this.
Cause we have that
$$\Delta T = \frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Mv_0^2 = \frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Cx^2,$$
and that's only true if ##−Mv_0^2=Cx^2.##

George Jones said:
Actually, ##x = A \sin \left( \omega_0 t + \phi \right)##.
I'm just taking that from the textbook. I already posted that part but i will do it again if that helps u:
2.JPG
 

Attachments

  • 2.JPG
    2.JPG
    20.9 KB · Views: 530
  • #11
velvetmist said:
Cause we have that
$$\Delta T = \frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Mv_0^2 = \frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Cx^2,$$

I agree with
$$\Delta T = \frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Mv_0^2 ,$$
but I do not understand the second equals sign, I do not understand why
$$\Delta T = \frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Mv_0^2 $$
is also equal to
$$\frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Cx^2 .$$

velvetmist said:
I'm just taking that from the textbook.

No, you have not taken it from the textbook. You wrote (and used)

velvetmist said:
But we got that ## x = A \sin(\phi)##

which is incorrect, and which is not in the textbook.
 
  • #12
George Jones said:
I agree with
$$\Delta T = \frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Mv_0^2 ,$$
but I do not understand the second equals sign, I do not understand why
$$\Delta T = \frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Mv_0^2$$
is also equal to
$$\frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Cx^2 .$$
Sorry, sorry, I'm really sorry, i just made a lot of typos, I meant
$$\frac 1 2 Mv^2+\frac 1 2 Cx^2 .$$
That's because
$$ \Delta (T+V) =\Delta E = \frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Mv_0^2,$$
cause here ##\Delta V=0.## And we also know that
$$\frac{1}{2} Mv^2 + \frac{1}{2} Cx^2 = \frac{1}{2} M \left( \frac{dx}{dt} \right)^2 + \frac{1}{2} Cx^2 = E,$$
then
$$\frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Mv_0^2 = \frac{1}{2} M \left( \frac{dx}{dt} \right)^2 + \frac{1}{2} Cx^2.$$

George Jones said:
No, you have not taken it from the textbook. You wrote (and used)
Sorry, i just didn't read "at t=0", which is a huge mistake, but even like that i think is kind of weird cause he have that
$$ v_0 = \sqrt {\frac {C} M} A \cos(\phi) = \sqrt {\frac {-C} M}x .$$
And we know that
$$x = A \sin \left( \omega_0 t + \phi \right).$$
Then
$$v_0 = \sqrt {\frac {C} M} A \cos(\phi) = \sqrt {\frac {-C} M} A \sin \left( \omega_0 t + \phi \right).$$
$$\sqrt {-1}\cos(\phi)=\sin \left( \omega_0 t + \phi \right).$$
I probably made a mistake, or something like that cause i find this equation really weird.
 
  • #13
velvetmist said:
That's because
$$ \Delta (T+V) =\Delta E = \frac 1 2 Mv^2-\frac 1 2 Mv_0^2,$$
cause here ##\Delta V=0.##

No,
$$\Delta V = \frac{1}{2} C x^2 - \frac{1}{2} C x_0^2 .$$

See equation (5.20).
 
  • Like
Likes velvetmist
  • #14
George Jones said:
No,
$$\Delta V = \frac{1}{2} C x^2 - \frac{1}{2} C x_0^2 .$$

See equation (5.20).
Thank you so much! I finally get it, all of my questions were between pages 149 and 150. We will see conservation of energy in three classes, that's why I was so confused about that.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top