Plane Pendulum and Beyond by Phase Space Geometry Bradley Klee† Department of Physics, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701 (Dated: February 7, 2017) The small angle approximation often fails to explain experimental data, does not even predict if a plane pendulum’s period increases or decreases with increasing amplitude. We make a perturba- tion ansatz for the Conserved Energy Surfaces of a one-dimensional, parity-symmetric, anharmonic oscillator. A simple, novel algorithm produces the equations of motion and the period of oscillation to arbitrary precision. The Jacobian elliptic functions appear as a special case. Thrift experiment combined with recursive data analysis provides experimental verification of well-known predictions. Development of the quantum/classical analogy enables comparison of time-independent perturba- tion theories. Many of the useful notions herein generalize to integrable and non-integrable systems in higher dimensions. I. INTRODUCTION z s Space and time play foundational roles in all ex- g periments and most equations. Measurement of l space only requires the definition of a standard θ0 length. What difficulties prevent easy measurement θ of time? A day or year is too long for describing m the fall of an apple, while heartbeats depend on un- a predictable biological conditions. A pendulum, as x in Fig. 1, oscillates through time, setting a scale b on the order of one second when l 1/4(m) and g 9.81(m/s2). ≈ FIG. 1. Simple pendulum and coordinate geometry. Half ≈History credits Galileo with early discoveries re- height a determines the period of oscillation. garding the time dependent behavior of oscillating pendulums1. He noticed the isochrony of identical pendulums, manifest as one characteristic time, the period. Galileo’s initial pronouncement that the pe- sets undetermined functions to force convergence of riod depends not on amplitude now resounds false. the energy to one conserved value. One dimensional The flourishing of classical mechanics provides a log- oscillators are integrable systems, so time depen- ical alternative in perturbation theory. Experiments dence follows readily. yielding digital data support predictions contrary to The program of derivation involves no mistaken the musings of Galilean renaissance. assumptions and refuses temptation to plagiarize The timing of a pendulum does depend on its ini- standard references. By solving the pendulum equa- tial condition2,3. After Legendre and Abel, C.G.J. tions of motion to high precision, we obtain a series Jacobi standardized and optimized the solution of expansion of the Jacobi Elliptic functions sn(ϑ, α) the pendulum’s motion by defining a set of elliptic and cn(ϑ, α). This exercise distinguishes the deriva- functions4,5. The Jacobian elliptic functions have tion as arbitrary-precision and free of error. many interpretations in physics, but do not fall A third approximation suffices to describe the arXiv:1605.09102v3 [physics.class-ph] 5 Feb 2017 into the core curriculum because they present se- pendulum’s motion through one period so long as rious technical challenges6,7. As an alternative the the motion obeys θ [ π/2,π/2]. A thrift experi- ∈ − physics literature contains a variety of approximate ment takes place in this range. The setup utilizes a solution methods, including: ad hoc8,9, Lindstedt- modified USB mouse to produce digital data. Anal- Poincar´e2,10,11, and canonical perturbation theory12. ysis yields extracted parameters that closely agree Our novel method views the pendulum as a one- with carefully derived predictions. dimensional, anharmonic oscillator with parity sym- Ultimately we reveal the details of a semiclassi- metry. In a two-dimensional phase space spanned cal analogy between time-independent perturbation by position and momentum coordinates, geometric theories. In quantum mechanics approximate wave- methods apply. Motion happens along a Conserved functions must nearly conserve energy. Comparing Energy Surface (C.E.S.), which is not too different results for quartic oscillators, we derive a quantum from the perimeter of a circle. We make a defor- condition, which is equivalent to the Sommerfeld- mation ansatz and apply an iterative algorithm that Wilson prescription in the classical limit. 2 II. DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS gives a concise result 2 b dx T0 = lim 4 (2) a→0 0 2√g(a−z) The plane pendulum consists of a massive bob at- R tached by a string or a rod, assumed massless, to an = lim 2 l a dz =2π l , axle as in Fig. 13. Gravity acts on the bob with verti- a→0 g 0 √z(a−z) g q R q cal force mg, and the attachment applies a response which requires small-angle identity s x 2√lz force, the tension. As time elapses the bob swings to change from the circular line element≈ ds≈to the and executes a periodic motion along a circular tra- horizontal dx, and finally to the vertical dz. The jectory of radius l. In librational motion the sign of θ˙ simple result only applies in the limit a 0. alternates while the pendulum reaches a maximum In a general one-dimensional oscillation→ with deflection θ at regular intervals throughout the 0 small-amplitude period T , we usually have some- experiment.± The time of one complete oscillation, 0 thing along the lines say from θ to θ back to θ , is called the period. 0 − 0 0 Table I collects the relevant physical quantities, T (α, ǫ)= f(α, ǫ) T0, (3) read directly from Fig. 1. Dimensional symbols [ L ], with f(α, ǫ) a complicated function of dimensionless [ M ], and [ T ], denote length, mass, and time. The energy α, and ǫ, structure constants of the potential quantities l/g, a/g, b/g all have dimension { } energy. of time, [ T p]. Assumingp p Galileo’s observation cor- With the pendulum experiment the trouble is in rect, l/g must be the dimensional scale of time the initial conditions. Each initial condition deter- becausep quantities a,b depend on the amplitude mines one critical parameter of motion. { } 1 α = a/l = 1 cos(θ ) = sin2(θ /2), (4) 2 − 0 0 TABLE I. Dimensional Quantities. proportional to the total energy. In the simple har- 2 Symbol Dimension Trigonometric Form monic approximation α tends to zero as θ0. Consid- ering this fact, the hypothesis that factor f(α, ǫ) l [ L ] · → 2 f(α) has a non-terminating power series expansion a [ L ] l sin (θ0/2) seems likely. Referencing the expansion of K(α)13 b [ L ] l sin(θ0/2) cos(θ0/2) −2 we have g [ L ] [ T ] · ∞ T (α) 2 (2 n 1)!! 2 m [ M ] · f(α)= = K(α)= − αn T π (2 n)!! 0 nX=0 α 9α2 25α3 =1+ + + ... (5) A naive energy argument improves the estimation. 4 64 256 The maximum potential energy is 2mga. Assume Numerous approximation schemes (cf.8, Table III) that this energy converts entirely to kinetic energy as aim to simplify the description of a pendulum’s an- the mass m moves at constant velocity 2√ga through harmonicity, as measured by coefficients to the pow- a distance 8b, then T0 4b/√ga. In the small angle ≈ ers of α. At small α all formulae for T (α) must approximation, a l, b √la, and T0 4 l/g, asymptotically approach Eq.5, so exact and approx- ≪ ≈ ≈ certainly an underestimate. p imate agreement to (α) and (α2) respectively is a The exact period follows from a more sophisti- common feature ofO the manyO published results. For cated calculation, again based on conservation of en- example, the empirical Kidd-Fogg formula9 has ergy. At any half-height z = (l/2)(1 cos(θ)) < a, − 1 α 5α2 15α3 the kinetic energy equals 2mg(a z), the velocity f(α)= =1+ + + ... (6) − 1/4 equals 2 g(a z), and the period equals2,5 (1 α) 4 32 128 − − p Of course, other factors introduce uncertainty to 14 T (a/l) = T dt =4 lθ0 ds (1) physical experiments , and these uncertainties al- 0 0 2√g(a−z) R R ways cause the data to deviate from theoretical ex- =4 l π/2 dξ =4 l K( a ), pectations. Say that we write the standard deviation g 0 √1−(a/l) sin2(ξ) g l σ in units of T , then σ competes in order of mag- q R q 0 nitude with terms from the expansion of f(α) until n where ds goes along the arc of motion. The com- eventually, for some integer n, we have cn α σ. plete elliptic integral of the first kind, K, admits This logic is useful in data analysis and gives≪ some no simple closed-form. Alternatively, the small an- restraint to our exploration of approximate solu- gle approximation eliminates dependence on a and tions. 3 III. PHASE SPACE GEOMETRY need to apply a canonical transformation15 m2 g 1/4 A. Small Angle Approximation q q = q , (10a) → l e l 1/4 e p p = p , (10b) E → m2 g ω E(α) eE(α)= 0 p2 + q2 ,e (10c) → 2 with ω0 = g/l. Transformation Eq. 10 takes ellip- tical trajectoriesp into circular trajectories with equal energy and equal enclosed phase area λ(α)= dq p(α, q)= dq p(α, q). (11) I I The period e e e ~p ~q m dq T (α)= dt = dq = , (12) I I p(α, q) I ω0 p(α, q) e also remains invariante undere the canonical trans- formation Eq. 10. To see this we use another FIG. 2. Total Energy Surface. Level sets of the total en- definition16 for the period ergy function project trajectories into the plane of phase −1 space, the Conserved Energy Surfaces. dλ dE dq T = = dq = , (13) dE I dp I ω0 p In terms of the phase space coordinates, (q, p) = with α dependence suppressed.