What is the Angular Frequency of Small Oscillations for a One-Dimensional Mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Borus Ken
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mechanics Taylor
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on finding the angular frequency of small oscillations for a one-dimensional mass based on a given potential energy function. The user successfully determined the equilibrium position as lambda R but struggled to express the potential energy in the required quadratic form. They attempted a Taylor expansion but initially made errors in their formulation. After receiving guidance on correctly applying the Taylor series, the user was able to resolve their confusion and solve the problem. The exchange highlights the importance of precise mathematical formulation in physics problems.
Borus Ken

Homework Statement


This is the problem verbatim:

The Potential energy of a one-dimensional mass m at distance r from the origin is

U(r) = U0 ((r/R) +(lambda^2 (R/r))

for 0 < r < infinity, with U0 , R, and lambda all positive constants. Find the equilibrium position r0. Let x be the distance from equilibrium and show that, for small x, the PE has the form U = const + 1/2 kx^2. What is the angular frequency of small oscillations?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
I have solved for the equilibrium position by taking the first derivative and setting that equal to zero to find that position to be lambda R.

My problem now is that I cannot figure out how to arrange the equation in the aforementioned form. I have taken the Taylor Polynomial of U(r) and eliminated the first few terms leaving the second derivative multiplied by x^2/2 which is obviously where that portion in the above equation comes from. However, I do not get a constant if I sub r0 in ignoring x because of it being small. I really have tried many different attempts and cannot figure it out.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

Please show your attempt at the Taylor expansion so that we can see if there are any errors in your work. I don't understand the following statement:
Borus Ken said:
I do not get a constant if I sub r0 in ignoring x because of it being small.
 
Thanks for the reply and I apologize. My attempt is as follows.

U( r) = U ( r) + U'(r)x + (1/2)U''(r)x^2... Ignoring the following terms because x is already small and x^n where n >2 is negligible. Also, from what I have gathered the first term can be ignored and U'(r)x near equilibrium will be close to zero. Therefore the only term left is (1/2) U''(r)x^2. For the second derivative of the equation I get:

U''(r) = U0 2(lambda^2) R/r^3.

Subbing in r0 + x gives a nasty equation. However, If I ignore x because it is small ( not sure if I can do that, I was just trying to find a solution) I only get a term proportional to x^2 or akin to 1/2 kx^2 rather than that plus a constant. So I am stumped to say the least.
 
OK, you have the right idea, but you need to be careful with exactly how you write the expansion. You wrote
Borus Ken said:
U( r) = U ( r) + U'(r)x + (1/2)U''(r)x^2...
But note how this doesn't make sense as written. On the left you have ##U(r)##. But the first term on the right side is also ##U(r)##. Clearly, something's wrong here.

Review how to do a Taylor expansion about a point. For example, see this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_series#Definition

You are dealing with a function of ##r##, so you should replace all the ##x##'s in the link with ##r##'s. You also need to think about the choice of the point ##a## in the link. That is, decide what value of ##r## that you want to "expand about".
 
  • Like
Likes Borus Ken
Thank you TSny.

I haven't reviewed Taylor Series for about a year and after reviewing them I was quickly able to solve the problem. I appreciate your help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
939
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K