I Wanted to see if anyone knew if this was trivial

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter alex2066
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the modeling of particle interactions using second-order nonlinear differential equations, specifically focusing on the forces exerted by particles based on their distances. Participants debate the validity of proposed solutions, highlighting issues with conservation of momentum and the generalizability of solutions beyond two particles. Concerns are raised about the initial conditions and the mathematical integrity of the logarithmic terms used in the equations. Despite attempts to extend the model to three and four particles, the consensus suggests that the proposed solutions do not satisfy the equations of motion. The conversation concludes with a recognition of the limitations of the current approach and the need for further refinement.
alex2066
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Wanted to see if anyone knew if this was trivialParticles exert forces (and therefor the acceleration) partials exert on each other very by the inverse square of the distanceModeled by this system of seconded order nonlinear differential equations

a(t)’’=(Q/|Q|)(a(t)-b(t))^-2

b(t)’’=(Q/|Q|)(a(t)-b(t))^-2solved hear

a(t)=-K ln(T)+ AT+C

b(t)=-K ln(T)+ BT+Ca’’=-K/t^2

b'’=-K/t^2
with these variable constrictsC=AR#

-K=(Q/|Q|)(A-B)^-2

1/√|K|=A-Bdemonstration-K*-1/t^2=( (-Kln(T)+AT+C) -(-Kln(T)+BT+C))^-2

-K*-1/t^2=( (-Kln(T)+AT+C) -(-Kln(T)+BT+C))^-2K/T^2=( ( (A -B)T)^-2

K/T^2=( ( (A -B)T)^-2K/T^2=(1/√|K|*T)^-2

K/T^2=(1/√|K|*T)^-2K/T^2= K/T^2

K/T^2= K/T^2
so it solves

=)I also have it for more 3 and 4 particles

The whole thing is in a XL doc at this linkhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8YKu_MJDZkGaVlfN0tkNGI4RGs/view?usp=sharing

if your interested I can make a doc on how I solved it
or if i messed up somewhere please tell me
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
One of your acceleration terms should get a negative sign, otherwise they violate conservation of momentum.
alex2066 said:
a(t)=-K ln(T)+ AT+C

b(t)=-K ln(T)+ BT+C
That is clearly not the general solution. What happens at t=0, for example?

And you cannot generalize it to more than two particles.
 
mfb said:
One of your acceleration terms should get a negative sign, otherwise they violate conservation of momentum.
thank you
i don't know how i did not see that
=P

still a solution to that differential equation even though it violates conservation of momentum.
i wonder if there is way to write it so that it dose not.

mfb said:
And you cannot generalize it to more than two particles.

if by generalize you mean solve i degree with you hear.for 3

a(t)''=X(a(t)-b(t))^-2+Z(a(t)-c(t))^-2
b(t)''=X(a(t)-b(t))^-2+Y(b(t)-c(t))^-2
c(t)''=Z(a(t)-c(t))^-2+Y(b(t)-c(t))^-2

a(t) = -K ln(T) + A T+P
b(t) = -K ln(T) + B T+P
c(t) = -K ln(T) + C T+P

once replaced
K = X (A-B)^-2 + Z (A-C)^-2
K = X (A-B)^-2 + Y (B-C)^-2
K = Z (A-C)^-2 + Y (B-C)^-2one numerical solution
K = -2
A = 0
B = 1
C = 2
Z = 4
X = 1
Y = 1
P = any real number

and for 4
a(t)'' = X (a(t)-b(t))^-2 + Z (a(t)-c(t))^-2 + W (a(t)-d(t))^-2
b(t)'' = X (a(t)-b(t))^-2 + Y (b(t)-c(t))^-2 + T (d(t)-c(t))^-2
c(t)'' = Z (a(t)-c(t))^-2 + Y (b(t)-c(t))^-2 + U (c(t)-d(t))^-2
d(t)'' = W (a(t)-d(t))^-2 + T (d(t)-c(t))^-2 + U (c(t)-d(t))^-2a(t) = -K ln(T) + A T+P
b(t) = -K ln(T) + B T+P
c(t) = -K ln(T) + C T+P
d(t) = -K ln(T) + D T+P

once replaced
K = X (A-B)^-2 +Z (A-C)^-2 +W (A-D))^-2
K = X (A-B)^-2 +Y (B-C)^-2 +Q(D-B)^-2
K = Z (A-C)^-2 +Y (B-C)^-2 +U (C-D)^-2
K = W(A-D))^-2 +Q(D-B)^-2 +U (C-D)^-2

any algebraic solution will work
for exampleZ (A-C)^-2 = K
U (C-D)^-2 = K
Q (D-B)^-2 = K
Y (B-C)^-2 = - K
X (A-B)^-2 = K
W (A-D))^-2 = - Kor

K = 1
A = 0
B = 2
C = 1
D = -1
Y = -4
Z = 1
Q = 9
X = 1
U = 4

im sure you can see the pattern
 
alex2066 said:
a(t) = -K ln(T) + A T+P
b(t) = -K ln(T) + B T+P
c(t) = -K ln(T) + C T+P
Those are not solutions to the equations of motions.

Let a(0)=0, b(0)=1, c(0)=100. Now find parameters that fit.
Your logarithm doesn't allow a time of zero at all. But even if you restrict it to positive times:
Let a(1)=0, b(1)=1, c(1)=100. Now find parameters where the particles satisfy the equations of motion. You cannot.
 
i can't do it where momentum is conserved but i think i can do it if that is overlooked

dose it have to be 100 1 and 0 or can it be any 3 values.

hear it is for 2 i think i can do it for 3

a(t)'' = - (a(t)-b(t))^-2
b(t)'' = - (a(t)-b(t))^-2

a(t) = - ln(t+c) + A T + M
b(t) = - ln(t+c) + B T + W
W - M = C
1 = A-B
1 = B-A

- 1/T^2 = ( (-ln(T+C)+AT+M) -(-ln(T+C)+BT+W)^-2
- 1/T^2 = ( (-ln(T+C)+AT+M) -(-ln(T+C)+BT+W)^-2

1/(T+C)^2 = ( AT -BT+C)^-2
1/(T+C)^2 = ( AT -BT+C)^-2
1/(T+C)^2 = ( (A -B)T+C)^-2
1/(T+C)^2 = ( (A -B)T+C)^-2
1/(T+C)^2 = ((T+C)^-2
1/(T+C)^2 = (T+C)^-2
1/(T+C)^2 = 1/(T+C)^2
1/(T+C)^2 = 1/(T+C)^2
i guess that might have been what you meant by 2 is the only one with a general solution. sorry i did not understand what you meant by general i thought you just meant solved. still i think i can do it with 3

im going 2 spend some time thinking about it. your probably right I misunderstood what you meant by general.
i just thought that this was interesting.
i think i can solve it for
a(t)'' = (N(a(t)-b(t))^-2 + (M(c(t)-a(t)))^-2
b(t)'' = (N(b(t)-a(t)))^2 + (Z(b(t)-c(t)))^-2
c(t)'' = (M(c(t)-a(t)))^-2 + (Z(c(t)-b(t)))^-2
M,N,Z are all either 1 or -1(of coerce there is no such thing as negative distance.)with
a(t) = ln(KT+P) + ln(-QT+R) + A T + X
b(t) = ln(KT+P) + ln(-QT+R) + B T + Y
c(t) = ln(KT+P) + ln(-QT+R) + C T + Zi still can't even solve or find on the internet solutions to

a(t)'' = (a(t)-b(t))^-2
b(t)'' = (a(t)-b(t))^-2
a''+b''=0

i still think
still at least it solves
a(t)'' = (a(t)-b(t))^-2
b(t)'' = (a(t)-b(t))^-2
a''=b''

I still can't solve it where momentum is conserved but i will keep trying. I am a bit busy right now geting ready for my first your of collage next year.reagards alex
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You can edit your posts if you want to add something.
alex2066 said:
i can't do it where momentum is conserved but i think i can do it if that is overlooked
Not if you want to find solutions to the equations of motion.
alex2066 said:
dose it have to be 100 1 and 0 or can it be any 3 values.
The 3 values I set. A general solution has to work for all initial conditions, including those.
alex2066 said:
i think i can solve it for
You cannot. And you should check your solutions before you make claims like that. Every such check, properly done, will show you that the approach does not work. So I can save both of us some time and close the thread.
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
Back
Top