Understanding Simple Harmonic Motion with Position and Acceleration Graphs

  • Thread starter Thread starter physks4dumies
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Harmonic
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on sketching a position vs. time graph using an acceleration vs. time graph in the context of simple harmonic motion. It is established that the position graph is a cosine wave while the acceleration graph is a sine wave. Participants clarify that the position graph can be expressed as x = x_0 sin(ωt), indicating a relationship between the two graphs. There is confusion about whether the position graph should be a negative cosine function, which is confirmed to be partially correct but requires adjustment by a constant. Ultimately, the participants reach an understanding of how to relate the two graphs accurately.
physks4dumies
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Using the acceleration as a function of time graph, we are required to sketch the position as function of time graph


Homework Equations


I know that the position vs. time graph is a cosine wave and the aforementioned is a sine wave. I have NO idea how to start considering there are no numbers involved.


The Attempt at a Solution



I tried to plot the point of the a vs time graph corresponding to the position...only 1/4 back. In the end, i got a graph that looked EXACTLY like the first. help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
if a=-\omega^2 x

it is possible to write x as a function of time...x=x_0 sin(\omega t)
 
I think this is meant to be in variables.
http://euclid.hamline.edu/~arundquist/latex/showequation.php?eqn_id=31336
so given the definition of the cosine graph, we know the amplitude and the period.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
well since the a vs t graph is a cosine function, wouldn't the x vs. t graph be a negative cosine function? (basically the same thing--inverted?)
 
physks4dumies said:
well since the a vs t graph is a cosine function, wouldn't the x vs. t graph be a negative cosine function? (basically the same thing--inverted?)

correct, though not entirely. the position graph will be adjusted by some constant. take a look at rockfreaks equation, what is it?
 
ooh i understand it now! Thanks eeryone
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top