Particle in a conservative force field + SHM

AI Thread Summary
Particles in conservative force fields exhibit simple harmonic motion (SHM) for small amplitudes, as indicated by the relationship between force and potential energy. The discussion highlights the mathematical foundation for SHM, including the necessary conditions for a force to be conservative. A counterexample is presented with a potential function that does not yield SHM, suggesting that not all conservative fields lead to harmonic motion. The conversation also references sources that support the notion that SHM arises from linear forces near equilibrium. Ultimately, the requirement for linearity in the force for small displacements is emphasized as a key condition for SHM in conservative fields.
m00npirate
Messages
50
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I read online in several places that any particle in motion in a conservative force field undergoes simple harmonic motion for small amplitudes.
I am attempting to prove this is true out of my own curiosity, but I don't know if I have the tools necessary to prove it. My math background is Calculus through half of multivariate, basic real analysis, and very simple differential equations (separation of variables).
Thanks in advance.

Homework Equations



I know that for a field to be conservative, F=\nabla f for some f.
Also, a particle in simple harmonic motion must be expressible in the form:
E = \frac{\alpha}{2} q^{2} + \frac{\beta}{2} \dot{q}^{2}
where \omega = \sqrt{\frac{\alpha}{\beta}}

or
\ddot{x} + \omega^{2}x = 0I have no idea how to proceed other than to solve some partial differential equations with unknown functions. Is there any easier way to prove this for the general case?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This might not be the answer you may have hoped for. I wonder what sites told you that all conservative fields can produce an harmonic motion.
m00npirate said:
I read online in several places that any particle in motion in a conservative force field undergoes simple harmonic motion for small amplitudes.

As a counter example:
We have the potential function f=1x
then the vector field will become F=\nabla f=1

Good luck getting an harmonic oscillator out of such a vector field ;)
 
Perhaps they meant an attractive force? I'll try to find where I saw that again.

Edit: here's one
"The problem of the simple harmonic oscillator occurs frequently in physics because a mass at equilibrium under the influence of any conservative force, in the limit of small motions, will behave as a simple harmonic oscillator."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_oscillator#Applications
I saw it in a textbook too on google books. I'll try to find it again.
 
All that it requires is for the force to be linear in x for sufficiently small x. Can anyone think of a conservative (attractive) force for which this would be untrue? I would try on my own but we haven't really covered exactly how to construct these in calc yet ><
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top