Spectroscopy hookes law, derivation?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the confusion regarding the equation for Hooke's Law in the context of spectroscopy, specifically the term involving 'c'. Participants clarify that 'c' represents the speed of light, which is derived from the definition of wavenumber as frequency divided by 'c'. The use of reduced mass is highlighted as a simplification for calculations involving two oscillating objects, as opposed to a single object. There is also a debate about the accuracy of the terminology used in the source material, particularly regarding the distinction between frequency and wavenumber. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding these concepts in the context of harmonic oscillators.
popopopd
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
hi, i am a lillte confused why the equation for hookes law is

1/(2pi*c)*sqrt(k/m_reduced)?

where does c come from?

http://www.massey.ac.nz/~gjrowlan/intro/lecture5.pdf

- slide 8.
Untitled-1.png


also, is there any particular reason why we use reduced mass?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
This is not a Hooke's law, rather a result you can get by solving the motion equation for an oscillator assuming it obeys Hooke's law (so it is a harmonic oscillator).

I don't see where the c comes from either. Using reduced mass makes calculations much easier for the system made of two oscillating objects (as compared to the system containing one object oscillating around some equilibrium position).

Moving thread to physics.
 
Borek said:
result
Ah I found it. by definition wavenumber is v/c and that gave the equation 'c'
 
They stated ν is frequency, not wavenumber.
 
Borek said:
They stated ν is frequency, not wavenumber.
yeah thanks, they did. I think they are wrong.
 

Thread 'Mechanism of Energy Conservation in Zero-Amplitude Sum of EM Waveforms'

Assume that this is a case where by sheer coincidence, two sources of coherent single-frequency EM wave pulses with equal duration are both fired in opposing directions, with both carrying the same frequency and amplitude and orientation. These two waves meet head-on while moving in opposing directions, and their phases are precisely offset by 180 degrees so that each trough of one wave meets with the crest of the other. This should be true for both the electric and magnetic components of...
View full post »

Similar threads

Investigating Unexpected Results in Elementary Experiment
Replies
35
Views
4K
Hooke's law and circular motion.
Replies
36
Views
7K
No prefix: Understanding the Total Force on a Mass Attached by Two Springs
Replies
4
Views
2K
Why is there confusion with the sign in Hooke's Law equations?
Replies
5
Views
4K
Hookes law: Calculate the work done by compressing a spring
Replies
1
Views
3K
I Trying to understand my prof's derivation of Planck's Law
Replies
3
Views
2K
I Planck's 1st Derivation of Planck's Law?
Replies
17
Views
4K
Derivation of magnetic field of a Solenoid: Biot savart law
Replies
3
Views
8K
Approximating a spring constant for an air leg
Replies
1
Views
2K
Calculating the Planck Length
Replies
3
Views
344

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top