Varying Potential Energy and Amplitude in Unusual Harmonic Motion

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around determining the time period of oscillation for a particle with potential energy described by U=K|X|^3. Participants explore various approaches, including using force and acceleration equations, conservation of energy, and numerical methods. The consensus is that the time period is dependent on the amplitude and can be expressed as T = f(K, A, m), with some integrals leading to complex forms that require numerical solutions. The energy conservation method is highlighted as a viable approach, yielding a relationship between the time period and amplitude, specifically indicating that the period is proportional to A^(-1/2). The conversation emphasizes the challenges of solving nonlinear differential equations and the utility of computational tools like Wolfram Alpha for evaluating integrals.
  • #91
voko said:
The only problem I see in ehild's solution to the original problem is that the right-hand side must have the square root of 2k/m.

You are rigth, I forgot the square root from the right-hand side. The correct formula is

\int_0^A{\frac{dx}{\sqrt{A^3-x^3}}}=\int_0^{T/4}{\sqrt{\frac{2k}{m}}dt}.

The OP speaks about a particle performing periodic motion with amplitude A, when its potential energy function is k|x|^3. k is a constant. It asks how the time period varies with the amplitude. There is no words about slopes and gravity, but a particle well might have mass.
That potential energy can come from an electric field or the gravity of a specific mass distribution ... anything. What is the sense to consider the problem as rolling down along a slope? The potential energy is a general concept, does not necessarily mean gravitational energy near the Earth surface.

ehild
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
Arkavo said:
no it would not acceleration is x" rate of rate of change of x coordinate only you are calculating acceleration along the slope

I never wrote a=x''. I was trying to say that the net acceleration comes out different from that of OPs problem. What i was trying to prove was that barryj's and OPs problem are not analogy.

rude man said:
That was ehild's post that recommended the energy approach.

I tried what you did, wound up with mx'' + 3k/m x^2 = 0 and could not solve it either. I tried a "guessed" solution of x = Asin(wt) which was disastrous. Evidently, the oscillations are not pure sinusoids, neither should we expect them to be in view of the fact that the ODE is nonlinear.

This diffrential equation can be solved putting a=v*(dv/dx), and it reduces to the same v-x equation of ehild's. So one can use either method. The result is the same.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
815
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K