Solving Newton's Equations: Perturbative Solution

  • Thread starter Thread starter stunner5000pt
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving a mass falling under the influence of gravity, with and without air resistance. The original poster presents Newton's equations and seeks to explore a perturbative solution for the case where air resistance is considered a small perturbation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the formulation of the equations of motion, particularly the inclusion of air resistance and its effects on the motion of the mass. There are attempts to substitute known solutions into the modified equations and questions about the signs and interpretations of terms related to air resistance.

Discussion Status

Several participants are actively engaging with the problem, attempting to derive solutions and clarify the relationships between the perturbed and unperturbed systems. Some express uncertainty about the compatibility of the two models, while others are exploring integration techniques to solve the equations. There is no explicit consensus on the validity of the perturbative solution across all time values.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the assumption that air resistance is a small perturbation and question the conditions under which the perturbative solution remains valid. There are also references to potential difficulties in solving the differential equations involved.

stunner5000pt
Messages
1,447
Reaction score
5
LOng question but not that hard apparently...
Consider a body of mass m falling vertically from rest near the Earth's surface. if air resistance is ignored then Newton;s equation [tex]m \ddot{y} = -mg[/tex] (1.1) has the solution [tex]\tilde{y} (x) = -\frac{1}{2} gt^2 + y_{0}[/tex](1.2) where Yo is the initial position of the body. If air resistnace is taken into account Newton's equation must be modified to [tex]m \ddot{y} = -mg - \beta \dot{y}[/tex] (1.3) where beta is a positive constant. Assuming taht air resistance can be considered to b a small pertubartion (i.e. [tex]\left|\beta \dot{y} \right| << \left| mg \right|[/tex]) we can approximate (1.3) by the equation [tex]m \ddot{y} = -mg - \beta \dot{\tilde{y}}[/tex](1.4) where y(t) (tilde) is the unperturbed solution (with air resistance ignored) given by 1.2

Solve 1.4 and discuss how this perturbative solution which we call Yp(t) compares to Y(t) tilde and determine under what conditions (i.e. for what values of t) the perturbative solution is valid.

now [tex]\dot{\tilde{y}} (x) = -gt[/tex]
so am i simply going to substitute this into 1.4 and solve for y[t]?
doing that gets [tex]m \ddot{y} = -mg + \beta gt[/tex]
and [tex]y(t) = \frac{gt^3 \beta}{6m} - \frac{gt^2}{2} + tC_{2} + C_{2}[/tex]
is this the right way to go?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
stunner5000pt said:
[tex]m \ddot{y} = -mg - \beta \dot{y}[/tex]
Should the beta-ydot bit be positive since it opposes the motion of the mass. air resistance doesn't make it go faster.

Solve 1.4 and discuss how this perturbative solution which we call Yp(t) compares to Y(t) tilde and determine under waht conditions (i.e. for what values of t) the perturbative solution is valid.

To solve that equation (1.4), I would solve for [tex]\dot{y}[/tex] and then integrate to get a function for y. I don't think that the two models are compatible since one completely ignores air resistance, while the other takes it into account, so I might wrong, but that is what I would do.
 
so then what i have doen is correct? Since y tilde is totally diffferent from y itself. However y does depend on t , and x from my understanding. SO i cna solve for Yp(t) which i have given in my first post. But y tilde (t) ... would that be using this equation?

[tex]m \ddot{\tilde{y}} = -mg - \beta \dot{\tilde{y}}[/tex]
so here i am exclusively solving for Y tilde(t) .
 
Assuming that [itex]\beta[/itex] is small enough to be ignored, the "non-perturbative" solution, from my"= -mg is, of course, y= -(g/2)t2+ y0 and y'= -gt

Now, replace y' on the right of the equation by -gt:
[tex]my"= -mg- \beta(-gt)= -mg+ \beta gt[/tex]
That should be easy to integrate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
whats that latex you typed halls?

isnt that what i did in my first post though?
 
ok for the perturbed system I am solving
[tex]m \ddot{y} = -mg + \beta gt[/tex]
integrate twice and i get
[tex]Y_{p} (t) = \frac{ygt^3}{6m} - \frac{gt^2}{2} + C_{1} t + C_{2}[/tex]

the second part of this question asks under what conditions this solution is valid. There seem to be no resitrictions on the value of t. So this is valid for all t?
ALso need to solve (1.3)
taht is
[tex]m \ddot{y} = -mg - \beta \dot{y}[/tex]
integrate once

for the unperturbed system i get
[tex]m \ddot{y} = -mg - \beta \dot{y}[/tex]
integrate once and i get
[tex]\dot{y} = -gt - \frac{\beta y}{m} + C[/tex]
seem to be having trouble iwth this differential equation... any ideas on how to solve this?
 

Similar threads

Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K