Say somebody is spinning a mass on a string with a period $T$ around. If $T$ is very big, the mass will describe a small circle around the person's waist. If $T$ is very small, the plane of movement should be around shoulder high, with the actual radius being the full length of the arm and string.
http://wstaw.org/m/2011/11/27/m35.png
The question asks for the angle of equilibrium for a given $T$ and $R$. The angle $\theta$ is measured between the person and his arm. $\theta=0$ means that the string is straight down, and $\theta = \pi/2$ means that the string is parallel to the ground. $R$ is the length of arm and string.
So I thought that the two forces on the mass are the gravity, $F_g=mg$, and the centrifugal force, $F_c=m \omega^2 r=m \omega^2 \sin \theta R$. The two forces have a resulting force, which also acts in an angle $\tan \phi = F_c/F_g$ onto the mass.
http://wstaw.org/m/2011/11/27/m33.png
In equilibrium, both angles have to be the same. So I say:
$$\tan \theta = \tan \phi = \frac{m 4 \pi^2 \sin \theta R}{m g T^2}$$ $$\frac{\tan \theta}{\sin \theta} = \frac{m 4 \pi^2 R}{m g T^2} $$ $$\cos \theta = \frac{g T^2}{4 \pi^2 R}$$
http://wstaw.org/m/2011/11/27/m34.png
For the given values, $T=0.45s$ and $R=15cm$ I get an $\theta=1.23$, which seems reasonable to me.
Then the problem asks for $T=0.85s$. The question is worded as asking to trouble, so I do not feel to bad about my function giving me $\theta = 0.618i$.
But how is this supposed to make any sense at all? If I spin the mass slower, the angle has to be lower. If I spin with almost zero speed (infinite period $T$), I should get an angle around $\theta=0$, nothing else. But the angle is exactly zero for a given $R$ and $T$ and then goes imaginary beyond that.
Can anyone enlighten me, or tell me what I did wrong in the derivation?
More thoughts based on Mark Eichenlaub's answer
The forces perpendicular to the rope look like this:
http://wstaw.org/m/2011/11/27/m36.png
(Sorry, the restoring force has a Sine in it, no Tangent.)
The net force on the mass is therefore the difference:
http://wstaw.org/m/2011/11/27/m37.png
(If you plot this with Sine instead of Tangent, it comes out at 1.22 like I already had before.)
These are the values for the first part of the problem, and one can see the two points of equilibrium (including zero) clearly.
If the frequency is lower like in the second part, there is no equilibrium other than zero. So no matter how big the angle is, the restoring force is bigger than the centrifugal force.
http://wstaw.org/m/2011/11/27/m38.png
(This picure is slightly different with the Sine instead of Tangent as well, but it does not change the roots.)
In this light, the imaginary equilibrium point I got previously seems pretty right.