I Taylor Series Expansion of Quadratic Derivatives: Goldstein Ch. 6, Pg. 240

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the confusion regarding the Taylor series expansion in the context of kinetic energy and small oscillations as presented in Goldstein's Classical Mechanics. It clarifies that while the derivative of n is quadratic, the expression for kinetic energy already includes a quadratic term, meaning any linear contributions will lead to cubic terms when multiplied. The participants emphasize that multiplying a linear term by a quadratic term results in a cubic term, which is crucial for understanding the expansion in small oscillations. The conversation also touches on the interpretation of derivatives and their impact on the order of terms in the equations. Overall, the key point is that the kinetic energy expression inherently contains quadratic terms, and linear terms can be neglected for small oscillations, leading to cubic contributions.
Ben Geoffrey
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Can anyone tell me how if the derivative of n(n') is quadratic the second term in the taylor series expansion given below vanishes. This doubt is from the book Classical Mechanics by Goldstein Chapter 6 page 240 3rd edition. I have attached a screenshot below
osc.JPG
 

Attachments

  • osc.JPG
    osc.JPG
    27.5 KB · Views: 1,325
Physics news on Phys.org
It does not vanish and it is not what is being said. What is being said is that the expression for the kinetic energy already contains a quadratic term through the derivatives. Anything in the expansion of m that is of linear order or higher will therefore not contribute to the kinetic energy at quadratic order (eg, the linear term will lead to an overall cubic term) and can be neglected for small oscillations.
 
Can you tell me how the linear term in n becomes cubic when substituted in equation 6.5 ?

Appreciate your patience in dealing with amateurs
 
Something quadratic times something linear is something cubic.
$$
\mathscr O(x^2) \mathscr O(x) = \mathscr O(x^3)
$$
 
No but derivative of n is quadratic and n is linear, if we multiply both we we would get derivative of n square times n right ?
 
Ben Geoffrey said:
No but derivative of n is quadratic and n is linear, if we multiply both we we would get derivative of n square times n right ?
Which makes the term cubic in ##\eta##. Both ##\eta## and ##\dot\eta## count.

Also, it is not clear what you mean by "derivative of ##\eta## is quadratic". It is not, the point is that the expression for the kinetic energy is already quadratic in the small oscillations due to the appearance of ##\dot\eta_i \dot \eta_j##. Multiplying it by something that is linear therefore results in a cubic term.
 
No my doubt is x times derivative of x, will become x2 ?
 
Ben Geoffrey said:
No my doubt is x times derivative of x, will become x2 ?
It will be of second order in the small oscillations. When you assume that the oscillations are small, imagine writing ##x = \epsilon y##, where ##\epsilon## is a small fixed number. Then expand everything in ##\epsilon##. You should find that ##x## and ##\dot x## are of first order in ##\epsilon##.
 
Can you see I've understood it right, if x is displacement, in small oscillation problem we take x = xo + η where xo initial position is made to coincide with origin and hence becomes zero and there we have only the small displacement η . Now when substituting the first order Taylor expansion of mij into 6.5 in the second term we have to multiply the derivative of ni and the derivative of nj times n. That part is what I don't understand ?
 
  • #10
could you explain that part a little more ? what is the derivative of n ? and how does multiplying with n make it quadratic in n ? I understand if you multiply two same linear terms like x and x they become quadratic. But how come in this case ?
 
  • #11
When you insert the expansion of m into 6.5 you get a term proportional to ##\eta_k \dot \eta_i \dot\eta_j##. This term is obviously cubic in the small oscillations. Why do you doubt this?
 
  • #12
So its like the order of a differential equation ? y multiplied by y' . will have an order 2 ?
 
Back
Top