Small Oscillations: Spring Constant & Frequency

AI Thread Summary
For small oscillations, the behavior resembles that of a spring, with the potential energy approximated by a parabola at equilibrium. The effective spring constant is derived from the second derivative of the potential energy function, leading to the frequency formula w = sqrt(k/m). Confusion arises when applying this to a pendulum, where the potential energy function U(t) = mgL(1-cos(t)) results in an effective spring constant of mgL, leading to a frequency that seems inconsistent with standard formulas. However, using the moment of inertia (I = ml^2) instead of mass clarifies the situation, aligning the results with expected outcomes. This illustrates the importance of the variable used in the calculations, confirming that the method holds when expressed in terms of horizontal displacement rather than angular displacement.
asdf60
Messages
81
Reaction score
0
For small oscillations, the oscillation behaves like a spring, because the potential energy function can be approximated by a parabola at the equilibrium point. Now, the effective spring constant in these situations is equal to the second derivative of the potential energy function, and so the frequency w = sqrt(k/m), where k is the second derivative of the potential energy function.

I'm confused by this. In particular, I don't understand when this actually works. For example, for a pendulum, the potential energy function is U(t) = mgL(1-cos(t)), where t is theta. In this case the effective spring constant is mgL, so w = sqrt(gL). Obviously this doesn't agree with the accepted formula (which is also for small angles only). So what's going on here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hmm, it occurs to me now that if insead of m, i use the moment of inertia I = ml^2, i get the right formula. Is this a coincidence?
 
Yes, if you write it as a function of x, horizontal displacement, rather than theta, it comes out all right.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top