Rayleigh method Dimensional Analysis

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of the Rayleigh method for dimensional analysis in a physics problem. Participants are examining the relationship between various physical quantities, specifically density, radius, energy, and time, to derive a specific functional form.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related, Mathematical reasoning, Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion over obtaining an inverse of the expected result when applying dimensional analysis to the equation involving density, radius, energy, and time.
  • Another participant questions the assertion that the result is the inverse of what was expected, suggesting that the value of the constant c does not necessarily have to be -1.
  • A later reply clarifies that the derived expression does not directly equate to gamma but rather to a function of gamma, indicating that the participant's interpretation of the dimensional analysis may need refinement.
  • Participants discuss the implications of the derived relationships and constants, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of the definitions and relationships established during the analysis.
  • Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

    There is no consensus on whether the initial interpretation of the result being the inverse is correct. Multiple perspectives are presented regarding the role of the constant c and the interpretation of the derived equations.

    Contextual Notes

    The discussion highlights potential ambiguities in the interpretation of dimensional analysis results and the dependence on the value of the constant c, which remains unspecified in the context of the problem.

williamcarter
Messages
153
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement


rayleigh.JPG


ii)Rayleigh method gives me inverse of expected result.Would really appreciate your help.

Homework Equations


show that ##f(gamma)##=##(\frac {ro*R^5} {E*t^2})##
where ro=density
R=radius
E=energy

The Attempt at a Solution


We will do dimensional analysis on the elements ro,R,E
ro=kg/m^3=M*L-3
R=m=L
E=J=N*m=##\frac {kg*m} {s^2}*m##=M*L2*T-2

Now we say that gamma=C*roa*Rb*Ec*td (eq1)
where C=constant, a,b,c,d=yet other constants
Now we do dimensional analysis on eq(1)
M0*L0*T0=C*(M*L-3)a*(L)b*(M*L2*T-2)c*(T)d
now M:0=a+c =>a= -c
L:0=-3a+b+2c =>b= -5c
T:0= -2c+d =>d=2c
c=c
We wrote everything in terms of constant c.
Now we substitute back those constant in eq(q)
=>gamma=ro-c*R-5c*Ec*t2c

We rearrange => ##gamma##=##(\frac {E*t^2} {ro*R^5})##c

I would really appreciate it if you could tell me what exactly I did wrong because it seems I get 1/expected result.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Who says it's 1/expected result?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: williamcarter
Chestermiller said:
Who says it's 1/expected result?
Thank you for your prompt answer.
Well if c= -1 then I would get ##gamma##=##(\frac {ro*R^5} {E*t^2})## which they asked me to show.
 
c doesn't have to be -1. You showed that ##\left(\frac {Et^2} {\rho R^5}\right)^c=g(\gamma)##, not necessarily ##\gamma##. So, $$\frac{\rho R^5}{Et^2}=[g(\gamma )]^{-1/c}=f(\gamma )$$which is all you were asked to show.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: williamcarter
Chestermiller said:
c doesn't have to be -1. You showed that ##\left(\frac {Et^2} {\rho R^5}\right)^c=g(\gamma)##, not necessarily ##\gamma##. So, $$\frac{\rho R^5}{Et^2}=[g(\gamma )]^{-1/c}=f(\gamma )$$which is all you were asked to show.
Thank you, now is clear
 

Similar threads

Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
887
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
3K