What type of wave is described by y'' = -k*y^2

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jaydnul
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Type Wave
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The differential equation y'' = -k*y^2 does not describe sinusoidal motion, as evidenced by the failure of the substitution y = sin(√k*t) to satisfy the equation. Instead, this equation is related to the Emden-Fowler differential equation, which yields non-periodic solutions that diverge at x=0. The discussion also explores the implications of gravitational forces modeled by y'' = -k/y^2, indicating that such systems do not exhibit oscillatory behavior typical of sinusoidal functions. The conversation highlights the complexities of motion under inverse square laws, particularly in classical particle interactions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of differential equations, specifically second-order equations.
  • Familiarity with sinusoidal functions and their properties.
  • Knowledge of gravitational forces and inverse square laws.
  • Basic concepts of classical mechanics, particularly regarding oscillatory motion.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Emden-Fowler differential equation and its applications in physics.
  • Learn about gravitational dynamics and the behavior of particles under inverse square forces.
  • Explore the derivation and implications of Kepler's laws of planetary motion.
  • Investigate non-linear differential equations and their solutions in physical systems.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, and students studying classical mechanics, particularly those interested in the behavior of oscillatory systems and gravitational interactions.

jaydnul
Messages
558
Reaction score
15
A sinusoid can be described by the differential equation y'' = -k*y, where the force y'' is proportional to how far away from the center it is.

However in many physical systems the force between two bodies decreases with distance squared. So would we still classify the differential equation y'' = -k*y^2 as sinusoid as well?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you substitute ##y=\sin(\sqrt{k}~t)## in the first equation, you can verify that you have a solution. Is this also the case for the second equation?
 
Hmm, no you end up with $$-k\sin(\sqrt{k}~t) =-k\sin^2(\sqrt{k}~t)$$

So the second equation doesn't have sinusoidal solution? If not then what do we call that type of wave?
 
jaydnul said:
If not then what do we call that type of wave?
A fundamental sinusoid with odd harmonics ?
 
Sorry could you explain a littler further?
 
Thinking more about it y'' would be asymmetric, so even harmonics.
Since y^2 is always positive the force will always act in the same direction of -k .
Could it actually oscillate with that condition ?
 
$$
y^{"}=-ky^2
$$
is the Emden Fowler differential equation whose solution in this case is,
$$
y=-\frac{6}{kx^2}
$$
which diverges at ##x=0## and is obviously not periodic.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: PeroK, vanhees71 and berkeman
Oh ok thanks! I realized i wrote the wrong equation anyway. What about:

$$y’’=\frac{-k}{y^2}$$

Whats the solution for this one, and would it oscillate?
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
jaydnul said:
Oh ok thanks! I realized i wrote the wrong equation anyway. What about:

$$y’’=\frac{-k}{y^2}$$

Whats the solution for this one, and would it oscillate?
What do you think? If you rewrite constant ##k## as the product ##k=GM## where ##G## is the gravitational constant and ##M## is whatever is needed given the value of ##k##, you get ##a=-\frac{GM}{y^2}##. Does this equation look familiar? Does it have oscillatory solutions?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
  • #10
Right, and that's kind of the origins of my question. If you consider a proton and an electron as classical particles they will behave like this. And i assume the electron will oscillate back and forth as it passes through the proton. But this oscillation would technically not be sinusoidal correct? Since the force isn't proportional to distance, its proportional to the inverse square of the distance.
 
  • #11
If I were to consider a proton and an electron as classical particles, say two oppositely charged spheres, why would the electron pass through the proton and not just stick to it? The devil is in the details of this "pass through".
 
  • #12
Ok then just consider an extremely dense ring of mass in space that pulls a small mass through it, so the force would be approximated as 1/y^2, would this oscillate?
 
  • #13
jaydnul said:
Ok then just consider an extremely dense ring of mass in space that pulls a small mass through it, so the force would be approximated as 1/y^2, would this oscillate?
You could consider a WIMP (weakly interacting massive particle) that is gravitationally attracted to a large spherical mass but passes straight through, owing to the lack of any electromagnetic interaction. The solution for the distace ##r## as a function of time, given the particle is initially at rest at a distance ##r_0## from the centre of the mass ##M## is:
$$t = \sqrt{\frac{r_0^3}{2GM}}[cos^{-1} \sqrt{\frac{r}{r_0}} + \sqrt{\frac{r}{r_0}(1- \frac{r}{r_0})}]$$The full derivation is here, for example:

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/falling-to-a-star-with-varying-acceleration.866218/
 
  • #14
jaydnul said:
Ok then just consider an extremely dense ring of mass in space that pulls a small mass through it, so the force would be approximated as 1/y^2, would this oscillate?
You didn't change the math at all, so you still have the problem of what happens when ##y=0##.

In any case, you can solve ##y''=-k/y^2## by multiplying both side by ##y'## and then integrating. Then you can integrate once more using separation of variables.
 
  • #15
jaydnul said:
Right, and that's kind of the origins of my question. If you consider a proton and an electron as classical particles they will behave like this. And i assume the electron will oscillate back and forth as it passes through the proton. But this oscillation would technically not be sinusoidal correct? Since the force isn't proportional to distance, its proportional to the inverse square of the distance.
Well, the equation of motion
$$\ddot{x}=-G M/x^2$$
describes a planet moving radially in the gravitational field of the Sun. For this there are no periodic motions. Depending on the total energy it either falls finally into the Sun (##E<0##) or it moves to infinity (##E \geq 0##).

For the periodic planetary motion you need solutions with non-vanishing angular momentum. Then you have periodic motion on an Kepler ellipse for ##E<0## and non-periodic motions to infinity along parabolae (##E=0##) or hyperbolae (##E>0##).
 
  • #16
A particular solution of ##y^{"}=-\frac{-k}{y^2}## is,
$$
y=\left ( \frac{9k}{2} \right )^{\frac{1}{3}}x^{\frac{2}{3}}
$$
No matter how hard you contrive to bend physical reality to your desire, you won't succeed. At the risk of violating a PF rule, I render an English meaning of qur'an 23:71
"And should the Truth have followed their desires, surely the heavens and the Earth and all those therein would have perished..."
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
986
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K