Quadratic Potential: What Does It Mean?

AI Thread Summary
Quadratic potential refers to a potential energy function that is proportional to the square of the displacement, commonly represented as PE = kx², which results in a force proportional to distance. In the context of ecological models, this concept is used to draw analogies between animal movement and spring systems. The discussion highlights confusion regarding the specific spring constant of 1/4 in the paper, suggesting it may relate to the configuration of multiple springs acting in parallel. Additionally, variables like θ(t) and φ(t) are identified as functions that modify the diffusion coefficient over time, while γ represents the rate of return to mean territory size. The conversation underscores the complexities and challenges when applying physics concepts to biological scenarios.
nigels
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Hi group,

I'm currently trying to understand a physicists written paper on ecological models. In there, they used the term "quadratic potential" when comparing spatial diffusion with a spring system (see attachment 1). After searching online for this term, I found nothing directly relevant to the material at hand. Can someone tell me what it means intuitively, whether it's represented by a canonical equation, and if so, whether the derivation of that gives the form seen in the paper (attachment 2)? Thanks!

For the original equations the variables in attachment 2 refers to, see attachment (3).
 

Attachments

  • Screen shot 2012-04-06 at 9.18.59 PM.png
    Screen shot 2012-04-06 at 9.18.59 PM.png
    19 KB · Views: 547
  • Screen shot 2012-04-06 at 9.19.45 PM.png
    Screen shot 2012-04-06 at 9.19.45 PM.png
    6.8 KB · Views: 590
  • Screen shot 2012-04-06 at 9.19.36 PM.png
    Screen shot 2012-04-06 at 9.19.36 PM.png
    10.8 KB · Views: 591
Physics news on Phys.org
hi nigels! :smile:

"quadratic potential" just means that the potential energy is kx2 (or k(x-a)2 if the equilibrium position is at x = a) …

it results in force being proportional to distance

for example, a spring has PE = 1/2 kx2

(i doubt there's a rigorous justification for this model …

i don't think animals are actually connected to springs! :wink:)​
 
Thanks, tiny-tim! That makes much more sense now. However, I noticed that in the attachment, the spring constant is 1/4. Is that because the point is attached by a separate spring on both sides? Somehow that's equivalent to have two parallel springs for some reason?

By the way, the paper actually does make the implicit analogy that animals are attached to springs when they move from their den sites. Oh theoreticians...
 
nigels said:
Thanks, tiny-tim! That makes much more sense now. However, I noticed that in the attachment, the spring constant is 1/4. Is that because the point is attached by a separate spring on both sides? Somehow that's equivalent to have two parallel springs for some reason?

i don't know what γ θ and φ are :confused:
By the way, the paper actually does make the implicit analogy that animals are attached to springs when they move from their den sites. Oh theoreticians...

i think the hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy made a similar assumption about humans and their home planets :biggrin:
 
θ(t) and φ(t) are just functions that modifies the diffusion coefficient K to be time-dependent.

γ is defined as the "rate at which territory sizes tend to return to the mean size", which I understand as "the rate at which L_1 returns to its initial state".

Yet still, I can't explain the 1/4 spring constant that seems to be used (in attachment #2). I mean, should the constant be 1/2 + 1/2 = 1 since the springs are in a series? It's been a while since I took intro physics..

Here's the open-source paper in case you're curious. http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0034033

Ugh..it's always a nightmare when physicists work on biology problems.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top