Abstract:Slinkys that start from a stretched equilibrium position supported at the top and then released to fall under the influence of gravity exhibit the interesting behavior that the bottom of the slinky does not move until the collapsing top of the Slinky reaches the bottom. In this paper, we examine this problem using numerical methods to investigate whether this property holds for generalizations of the slinky physics such as changing the restoring force from the traditional Hookes law or considering random and non-uniform distributions of masses.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to explore whether the property that the bottom of a falling spring does not move still holds when the restoring force of the spring no longer follows the traditional Hooke's law (i.e., the linear relationship \(F = kx\)) or when non - uniform mass distribution is considered. Specifically, the author studied the behavior of the bottom of the spring under different forms of restoring forces (such as \(F = kx^p\), where \(p\) is an exponent) and different mass distribution situations through numerical methods. The study found that when \(p>0\), the property that the bottom of the spring does not move still holds; when \(p < 0\), the model exhibits complex collapse patterns, and in some cases, these patterns depend on whether the number of simulated masses is even or odd.
### Overview of Main Problems
1. **Background**: When a falling Slinky is released from its stretched equilibrium position, its bottom does not move before the top begins to collapse. This phenomenon is known as "spring levitation". This phenomenon has attracted wide interest in physics and has been demonstrated in many videos and scientific presentations.
2. **Research Purpose**: Through numerical simulation methods, explore whether the property that the bottom of the spring does not move still exists when the restoring force of the spring deviates from Hooke's law or the mass distribution is non - uniform.
3. **Research Methods**:
- **Model Establishment**: Model the spring as a chain composed of \(N\) point masses, and each point mass is connected by a massless spring.
- **Form of Restoring Force**: Consider the form of the restoring force as \(F = kx^p\), where \(x\) is the displacement of the spring, \(k\) is the generalized spring constant, and \(p\) is an exponent.
- **Initial Conditions**: Set the initial length \(L_S\) of the spring and the position of the central mass.
- **Numerical Simulation**: Use the Euler method or other high - order integration methods (such as the fourth - order Runge - Kutta method) for numerical integration to simulate the dynamic behavior of the spring.
4. **Main Findings**:
- When \(p>0\), as the number of point masses \(N\) increases, the property that the bottom of the spring does not move gradually emerges.
- When \(p < 0\), the collapse pattern of the spring becomes complex, and in some cases, it depends on whether \(N\) is odd or even.
- For different mass distributions (such as top - loaded, bottom - loaded, and randomly distributed), when \(N\) is large enough, the property that the bottom of the spring does not move still holds.
### Formula Summary
- **Restoring Force Formula**: \[F(y)=-k y^p\]
- **Initial Position Formula**: \[y_{i + 1}(0)-y_i(0)=\left(\frac{g\sum_{j = 1}^i m_j}{k}\right)^{1/p}\]
- **Acceleration Formula**:
- For the intermediate point mass: \[a_i=-g-\frac{k(y_i - y_{i - 1})^p}{m_i}+\frac{k(y_{i + 1}-y_i)^p}{m_i}\]
- For the bottom point mass: \[a_1=-g+\frac{k(y_2 - y_1)^p}{m_1}\]
- For the top point mass: \[a_N=-g-\frac{k(y_N - y_{N - 1})^p}{m_N}\]
- **Collision Handling**:
- Collision Time Step: \[\Delta t^*=\frac{y_{i + 1}-y_i}{v_i - v_{i + 1}}\]
- Velocity Update after Collision: \[v_i=\frac{m_i v_i+m_{i + 1}v_{i + 1}}{m_i+m_{i + 1}}\]
- Mass Update after Collision: \[m_i=m_i+m_{i + 1}\]
- Position Update after Collision: \[(y_j,m_j,v_j)\to(y_{j - 1},m_{j - 1},v_{j - 1})\text{ for }j = i + 1\]