Week of 9/4

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(when is it ok to assume physical expressions are complex?)
(when is it ok to assume physical expressions are complex?)
Line 14: Line 14:
 
Consider the forced, damped, simple harmonic oscillator.
 
Consider the forced, damped, simple harmonic oscillator.
  
<math>\ddot{x} + \gamma \dot{x} + \omega_0 ^2 = F/m</math>
+
<math>\ddot{x} + \gamma \dot{x} + \omega_0 ^2 x_r = F/m</math>
  
 
Let's pretend that both <math>x</math> and <math>F</math> are actually complex variables.   
 
Let's pretend that both <math>x</math> and <math>F</math> are actually complex variables.   
Line 20: Line 20:
  
 
<math>x = x_r + i x_i \ \ \ \  F = F_r + i F_i \,</math>
 
<math>x = x_r + i x_i \ \ \ \  F = F_r + i F_i \,</math>
 +
 +
Plugging these into the equation above we get
 +
 +
<math>\ddot{x_r} + \gamma \dot{x_r} + \omega_0 ^2 x_r +
 +
i\left[\ddot{x_i} + \gamma \dot{x_i} + \omega_0 ^2 x_i\right] = F_r/m + i F_i /m </math>

Revision as of 03:07, 8 September 2006

Try the following notebook

Mathematica.png Download manipulating complex numbers in Mathematica.

Also, take a look at Mathematica Tips and Tricks.

A real amplitude and phase measurement. Top figure shows the amplitude of the transmitted and reflected electric fields. Bottom are the corresponding amplitudes.

Emfields.gif


when is it ok to assume physical expressions are complex?

Consider the forced, damped, simple harmonic oscillator.

\ddot{x} + \gamma \dot{x} + \omega_0 ^2 x_r = F/m

Let's pretend that both x and F are actually complex variables. So we would write

x = x_r + i x_i \ \ \ \  F = F_r + i F_i \,

Plugging these into the equation above we get

\ddot{x_r} + \gamma \dot{x_r} + \omega_0 ^2 x_r +
i\left[\ddot{x_i} + \gamma \dot{x_i} + \omega_0 ^2 x_i\right] = F_r/m + i F_i /m

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox