0
$\begingroup$

When I was reading the L-C circuit in my textbook I came across the derivation of equations of instantaneous charge and current. enter image description here Which is no problem, but when I got to the derivation to current . It said something like -enter image description here

Which I don't quite understand. It says in the third line, Im = Wn Qm

.Where Wn (omega naught) => natural frequency of the LC circuit . And Im (I max) => maximum current. Qm ( Q max ) => maximum charge.

So, in other words it's trying to say that - Wn = 1/T Which is certainly not correct, as W(omega) is angular frequency and not just frequency. I.e. it has the unit of radians per second and not (sec.)^-1. BUT we know that -

enter image description here

So this could help us as by substituting the units of L(coefficient of self-inductance) and C (coefficient of capacitance), we can get the unit of Wn ... BUT SURPRISINGLY We would get - Wn = 1/ (sec.^2)^1/2 Which ultimately is Wn = (sec.)^-1

So basically it's saying that angular frequency is equal to just "frequency". Which contradicts the fact their units are different. HOW IS THIS TRUE ?

Then again, one might ask, how current can oscillate "angularly" ... ?

So my question is , are both natural frequency and angular frequency the same thing ? And if they are, then can someone plz explain this to me -

enter image description here

And also of course...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LC_circuit

To summarize, I just wanted to know few things, -

  1. How is angular frequency (radians per second) ( has kind-of "physical meaning") be equal to just frequency(cycles per second) [has all meanings {physical and electrical (oscillation of electrons)} but here, In our case, just focusing to electrical] ?

  2. If they are both equal, then, how can electrons oscillate angularly ?

  3. If angular frequency is not equal to frequency , then, is my textbook wrong ?

Even though I am poor in English, I am desperately trying to get the reader the "feel" of my question .

Also, I think I'm missing something, probably my basics are not so clear. Anyways,

Thank you very much for the answers. And sorry for poor English.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Radians aren't a real dimension. "rad/s" is the same thing as "1/s". Angular frequency is just defined as $2 \pi$ times frequency. $\endgroup$ – knzhou Jan 10 at 22:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/193684 $\endgroup$ – The Photon Jan 10 at 22:20
  • $\begingroup$ If Wn = 1/T (i.e. = Fo ) , then how can it be, at the same time,. Wn = 2π Fo ? $\endgroup$ – DEEKSHANT Jan 11 at 11:49
  • $\begingroup$ Why do you think it's trying to say that $\omega_0 = 1/T$? I don't see that anywhere. $\endgroup$ – Javier Jan 11 at 14:54
  • $\begingroup$ Can anyone tell me that, is my textbook justified by doing : Im = Wo Qm ? Wouldn't it be Im = Wo Qm/ 2π ? $\endgroup$ – DEEKSHANT Jan 11 at 15:16
0
$\begingroup$

This is an angular frequency not a frequency. This is common practice in all areas of physics/math/engineering etc. The frequency f0 = w0/(2*pi) and this is equal to 1/T, where T = period of oscillation. When dealing with oscillating or periodic equations governed by a term like sin(2*pift) the scale factor of 2*pi ensures that the function complete one cycle when t completes one frequency. f, not 2*pi*f is the quantity that most naturally relates to a physical measure of something (exception = rotational motion where w = d(theta)/dt).

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

So my question is , are both natural frequency and angular frequency the same thing ?

No. A resonant system has a natural frequency which is characteristic of the system. From the Wikipedia article Natural frequency:

Natural frequency, also known as eigenfrequency, is the frequency at which a system tends to oscillate in the absence of any driving or damping force.

The natural frequency of system may be expressed in units of ordinary frequency $(\mathrm{Hz})$ or angular frequency $(\mathrm{\frac{rad}{s}})$

Both ordinary frequency and angular frequency have the same dimension of inverse time $[\mathrm{T^{-1}}]$ but ordinary frequency express the number of cycles per second while angular frequency expresses the number of radians per second. Since there are $2\pi$ radians in one cycle, it follows that angular frequency is just the ordinary frequency multiplied by $2\pi\mathrm{\frac{rad}{cycle}}$.

Typically, the symbol for ordinary frequency is $f$ or $\nu$ while the symbol angular frequency is $\omega$ thus

$$\omega = 2\pi\nu$$

You can see this clearly in the expression for the energy of a photon of frequency $\nu$ which can be expressed as

$$E_\gamma = h\nu = \frac{h}{2\pi}2\pi\nu = \hbar\omega$$

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Radians are defined as the arc length over the radius - $\theta=arc length/radius$. But both can be kept in any units and you would have said that this is dimensionless. Essentially it is.

People could measure $\theta$ this way, or by degrees, which are two completely different methods, explaining the same logic. In physics, angles are generally measured in radians.

So when you say $f=\omega/2\pi$, $\omega$ is describing the same logic $f$ does, except in an angular context.

In this way, you could relate $\theta$ measured in radians and degrees as follows:

$\theta_r$ = $\theta_0$ $\pi/180$. These are not fundamentally different, it is just a form of definition.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.