SHM: Equation relating acceleration and displacement

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the equation of motion for a particle with acceleration a = -β(x-2), where β is a positive constant. The mean position is identified at x = 2, leading to the conclusion that the time period of oscillation is T = 2π/√β. A substitution of x-2 as X is debated, with some arguing it simplifies recognizing the system as simple harmonic motion (SHM). The consensus is that x-2 represents the displacement from the equilibrium position, making it a practical choice for analysis. Ultimately, the substitution aids in understanding the dynamics of SHM more clearly.
andyrk
Messages
658
Reaction score
5
A particle moves such that its acceleration is given by: a = -β(x-2). Here β is a positive constant and c is the distance from origin What is the time period of oscillation for the particle?

Solution: a = 0 at x = 2 (mean position)
a = -βX where X = x-2.
So, ω2 = β ⇒ T = 2π/ω = 2π/√β

My question is, why do we need to substitute x-2 as X? Can't we solve the problem without doing this?
 
  • Like
Likes spark802
Physics news on Phys.org
you can do the whole problem without the substitution. I guess that using the substitution means that you can immediately recognise that the problem is SHM.
 
So then, would we call x-2 as the distance from the mean position or x?
 
There's not much depth involved in this. I am overthinking things.
 
yeah :) x-2 is the displacement from the equilibrium position, which makes it a convenient choice to use as coordinate, instead of using x.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top