 Undamped resonant forcing has no bounded sinusoidal steady state

Undamped resonant forcing has no bounded sinusoidal steady state because the forcing continually adds energy to a mode that has no dissipation. For a series LC circuit driven from rest by $V_0\cos \omega t$, let $q$ be its electric charge and ${\omega }_0=1/\sqrt{LC}$. When $\omega \ne {\omega }_0$, imposing $q(0)=\dot{q}(0)=0$ on the linear ordinary differential equation givesBoth frequencies persist: the undamped homogeneous solution never disappears. Taking the limit $\omega \to {\omega }_0$ at fixed time produces the growing resonant response described in sinusoidal steady state. Its factor proportional to time cannot be removed by adding a bounded homogeneous solution.

For an original numerical example, choose $L=10\mathrm{mH}$, $C=1\mu \mathrm{F}$ and $V_0=1\mathrm{V}$. Then ${\omega }_0=10^4\mathrm{rad}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. At exactly ten resonant periods, $t=20\pi /{\omega }_0\approx 6.283\mathrm{ms}$, the resonant solution has $q=0$ butAt twenty periods the electric current doubles and the stored magnetic energy quadruples. These are ideal-model values; a real source and winding have finite electrical resistance and ratings.

With positive series resistance $R$, the resonant phasor calculation instead gives current amplitude $V_0/R$. The DOE handbook explicitly identifies resistance as the remaining series electrical impedance at resonance.^[ref] For weak damping, decay takes a time of order $2L/R$, which grows as resistance decreases. These noncommuting damping and observation-time limits at resonance explain why an infinite steady-state amplitude is a failed limiting calculation, not the actual finite-time response. The late-time transient assumption underlying sinusoidal analysis must be checked.^[ref]