Why Does a Particle Not Remain at x(t)=0 in a Negative Quartic Potential?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a particle's behavior in a negative quartic potential described by the equation \( U(x) = -Ax^4 \). Participants are exploring why a particle does not remain at the equilibrium position \( x(t) = 0 \) given certain initial conditions and total energy constraints.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the assumptions regarding the initial position and velocity of the particle, particularly whether \( x(t) = 0 \) can be a valid trajectory under different conditions. There is a focus on the implications of total energy being zero and the nature of the potential at \( x = 0 \).

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the conditions under which the particle might remain at \( x = 0 \) or move away from it. Some have suggested that the problem may be asking for a general case rather than a specific scenario, leading to different interpretations of the potential's behavior based on the sign of \( A \).

Contextual Notes

There is a lack of clarity regarding the assumptions about the value of \( A \) and the initial conditions of the particle, which are critical to understanding the problem. The discussion highlights the need for further exploration of these assumptions to reach a clearer understanding.

deuteron
Messages
64
Reaction score
14
Homework Statement
.
Relevant Equations
.
1695664884703.png

This question is from Collection of Problems in Classical Mechanics by Kotkin & Serbo, here, the answer is given as the following:

1695664930821.png


However, the graph of ##-Ax^4## looks like:

1695664966933.png


so shouldn't the trajectory be just ##x(t)=0##?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
deuteron said:
so shouldn't the trajectory be just ##x(t)=0##?
How do you arrive at this conclusion? Wouldn't ##x(t) = 0## contradict the assumption that the initial value ##x_0## is greater than zero?
 
b
TSny said:
How do you arrive at this conclusion? Wouldn't ##x(t) = 0## contradict the assumption that the initial value ##x_0## is greater than zero?
but there is no such assumption in the question, the second picture is from the solution, the first one is the question

My thought process was the following:
1. Total energy is ##0##
2. The potential has a minimum at ##U(x)=0##
3. Therefore the particle would require either a force (which is not present at ##x=0## since ##U(0)=0##) or kinetic energy (which is also not present since ##E=0## and ##U(0)=0## thererfore ##U(0)=E##, therefore ##E-U(0)=T(0)=0##)
4. That's why particle would continue to stay there since that is a stable equilibrium if ##-A>0##, and an unstable equilibrium if ##-A<0##
 
deuteron said:
b

but there is no such assumption in the question, the second picture is from the solution, the first one is the question

My thought process was the following:
1. Total energy is ##0##
2. The potential has a minimum at ##U(x)=0##
3. Therefore the particle would require either a force (which is not present at ##x=0## since ##U(0)=0##) or kinetic energy (which is also not present since ##E=0## and ##U(0)=0## thererfore ##U(0)=E##, therefore ##E-U(0)=T(0)=0##)
4. That's why particle would continue to stay there since that is a stable equilibrium if ##-A>0##, and an unstable equilibrium if ##-A<0##
You are correct that if the particle is initially placed at x = 0 with zero initial velocity, then the particle would remain at x = 0. But I think the problem was asking for discussion of the general case where the particle could start at any initial position with an initial velocity such that the total energy is zero. The answer assumes that ##A## is positive. However, this is not specified in the problem statement.

If ##A## is negative, then the only solution for zero total energy is your answer ##x(t) = 0## for all ##t##.
 
TSny said:
You are correct that if the particle is initially placed at x = 0 with zero initial velocity, then the particle would remain at x = 0. But I think the problem was asking for discussion of the general case where the particle could start at any initial position with an initial velocity such that the total energy is zero. The answer assumes that ##A## is positive. However, this is not specified in the problem statement.

If ##A## is negative, then the only solution for zero total energy is your answer ##x(t) = 0## for all ##t##.
Thanks!
 
To add to what @TSny has already said...

You are told that the potential energy ##U(x) = -Ax^4## and that the total energy is zero. So the kinetic energy is ##Ax^4##. (Hint: this is the first step in deriving the equation for ##x(t)##.)

We need to assume that ##x(0) \ne 0## otherwise the question is trivial (and would, give ## x(t) = 0##).

For illustration purposes the model answer explains what happens when ##x_0>0## in 2 cases:
- when initial velocity > 0 (particle moves to ##x=\infty##)
- when initial velocity < 0 (particle asymptotically moves to ##x=0##)
A similar argument would apply for ##x_0<0##.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
7K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K