Unable to solve an approximation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kidiz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Approximation
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around understanding an approximation in Griffiths' solutions manual related to the expression for k. The key point is that when σ is much greater than ωε, the approximation simplifies the expression for k to k = √(μσω/2). Participants clarify that using the condition σ >> ωε allows for significant simplifications in the calculations. There is also a request for resources on how to handle such approximations effectively. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly applying the approximation conditions to solve the problem.
Kidiz
Messages
21
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement



I'm trying to understand an approximation Griffiths does (in his solutions' manual - exercise 9.18-b) and I'm not quite getting it.
Let
$$k = \omega \sqrt{\dfrac{\epsilon \mu}{2}} [\sqrt{ 1 + (\dfrac{\sigma}{\epsilon \omega}})^2-1]^{1/2}$$

He says that, because ##\sigma >> \omega \epsilon##, we have:$$k = \sqrt{\dfrac {\mu \sigma \omega}{2}}$$

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
Essentially, my attempt was to say that ##(\dfrac{\sigma}{\epsilon \omega})^2 \approx \sigma ^2##. After that, and since sigma >> 1, I'd say that ##\sqrt {1 + \sigma ^2} \approx \sigma##, and for the same reasoning ##\sigma -1 \approx \sigma##, which would make everything inside the straight brakets be ##\sqrt{\sigma}##. After all this, ##k## would be ##\omega \sqrt {\dfrac{\epsilon \mu \sigma}{2}}##. Now, sadly, that's no way near the solution I'm supposed to arrive.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Kidiz said:
Essentially, my attempt was to say that ##(\dfrac{\sigma}{\epsilon \omega})^2 \approx \sigma ^2##.
That would correspond to ##\epsilon \omega \approx 1##. The approximation gives ##(\dfrac{\sigma}{\epsilon \omega})^2 \approx 1## which allows to simplify the expression.
You can use the same approximation for the first ω in the equation and then ignore some prefactor.
 
mfb said:
That would correspond to ##\epsilon \omega \approx 1##. The approximation gives ##(\dfrac{\sigma}{\epsilon \omega})^2 \approx 1## which allows to simplify the expression.
You can use the same approximation for the first ω in the equation and then ignore some prefactor.

I don't quite understand what you're saying. You're saying that ##(\dfrac{\sigma}{\epsilon \omega})^2 \approx 1## solves my problem? If so, I don't understand how, as it would eliminate my ##\omega ##.
 
If σ >> ωε then (σ/ωε) >>1.

And so (σ/ωε)2 +1 ≈ (σ/ωε)2

You'd then use your same reasoning however carrying the σ/ωε expression instead of just the σ.
 
Oh sorry, I read ##\approx## instead of >>. See the post above this how to do the approximation then.
 
rock.freak667 said:
If σ >> ωε then (σ/ωε) >>1.

And so (σ/ωε)2 +1 ≈ (σ/ωε)2

You'd then use your same reasoning however carrying the σ/ωε expression instead of just the σ.

Thank you! This works wonderfully. I wonder if there's a text somewhere that explains how to do this type of approximations or if one just picks them up as one goes.

mfb said:
Oh sorry, I read ##\approx## instead of >>. See the post above this how to do the approximation then.

That was my bad mfb, sorry. Initially, I had ##\approx##, but then edited and by mistake made it ##>>##, and then saw the error and edited again.
 
The book claims the answer is that all the magnitudes are the same because "the gravitational force on the penguin is the same". I'm having trouble understanding this. I thought the buoyant force was equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Weight depends on mass which depends on density. Therefore, due to the differing densities the buoyant force will be different in each case? Is this incorrect?

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
997
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
875
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
934