Why is the Second Derivative Negative in SHM?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the dynamics of a mass-spring system in simple harmonic motion (SHM). The original poster is attempting to understand the conditions under which the second derivative of displacement with respect to time becomes negative in the context of SHM, specifically when analyzing forces acting on a mass attached to a vertically hanging spring.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster presents a force equation derived from the forces acting on the mass and questions the sign of the second derivative in relation to their setup. Other participants question the definitions of direction and the implications of those definitions on the sign of acceleration.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging in clarifying the definitions of variables and the resulting implications for the equations of motion. There is a focus on understanding the relationship between the direction of acceleration and the defined coordinate system, with no explicit consensus reached yet.

Contextual Notes

The original poster is preparing for an exam and seeks to clarify their understanding of the force equation and its implications for SHM. There is an emphasis on the correct interpretation of signs in the equations based on the chosen coordinate system.

Pseudo Statistic
Messages
391
Reaction score
6
Say you had a spring hanging vertically-- spring constant k. A mass m is attached to it and it's at its equilibrium position, b.
Say, I decide to extend it (downward) such that its total extension distance from how it would be normally (without the mass) is x. Say I take the upward direction as positive. The moment I let go of it, the sum of the forces should be:
[tex]kx - mg = m \dfrac{d^{2}x}{dt^{2}}[/tex]
Now, at some point I'd be asked a question (on a test) that says "Prove SHM".
To do so I have to get my force equation to the form [tex]\dfrac{d^{2}x}{dt^{2}} = - \omega^{2} (x-b)[/tex], yet I can only do this if I had gotten:
[tex]mg - kx = m \dfrac{d^{2}x}{dt^{2}}[/tex]
As my force equation.
Can someone tell me what I did wrong in forming my original force equation? I'd like to clear this up before my exam tomorrow.
Thanks a lot.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Pseudo Statistic said:
Say, I decide to extend it (downward) such that its total extension distance from how it would be normally (without the mass) is x. Say I take the upward direction as positive.
Even though you took upward as positive, you still defined your "x" as being downward. You have the wrong sign for [tex]\dfrac{d^{2}x}{dt^{2}}[/tex]. An upward acceleration would be [tex]- \dfrac{d^{2}x}{dt^{2}}[/tex].
 
Exactly why is [tex]\dfrac{d^{2}x}{dt^{2}}[/tex] negative? Can you elaborate?
Thanks for the reply.
 
Pseudo Statistic said:
Exactly why is [tex]\dfrac{d^{2}x}{dt^{2}}[/tex] negative? Can you elaborate?
When [tex]\dfrac{d^{2}x}{dt^{2}}[/tex] is positive it means that the acceleration is in the +x direction. You defined x to be + downward. (Otherwise the restoring force would be -kx, not kx.)

You can stick with your definition of x, and call down to be positive. In which case the forces would be -kx & mg; set that sum equal to [tex]m \dfrac{d^{2}x}{dt^{2}}[/tex].
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K