How does wave physics work in this situation?
952318
there will stretching to the string, and the amplitude and frequency will be tranmitted....but the cycles wont be at light speed...so they wont allow for instantaneous communication.  Now if the cable was fiberoptic...and pulses were transmitted...hmm
437661
This requires the use of doppler shift formula for a moving source and stationary observer:\n\nf = f0 ( v / ( v + u ) )\n\nf0 = actual frequency = 5\nv = speed of wave = 20\nu = relative velocity of source away from observer = -10\n(since travelling toward)\n\nf = observed frequency = 10 Hz\n\nNow velocity = v = fl = frequency * wavelength\n\nso wavlength l = v / f = 20 / 10 = 2m
164646
You mean a 'frequency of 5.10^12Hz'\n\nCan you work it out yourself?:\n\nRemember that the speed (v) of the wave is 3×10^8 m/s,\nand that the wavelength is given by v/f\n\n[Edit: Darn, Kirchwey - don't do Glow's homework for her! ;-) ]
917168
The experimental fact verified by experiments with light rays and mirror show that the happenings follow certain laws: If the light ray hits normally it comes back by the same path. If obliquely then it comes back obliquely equally inclined to the normal at the point of incidence and in the same plane of normal and the incident ray. But if you do experiment in which you also measure the intensity of light incident and reflected, then you find that the intensity of reflected light is slightly less. This shows that some light is either absorbed or scattered following no specific laws. Now this is the experimental fact. Now explanations. Explanation depends upon what you assume light to be made up of. If photons, then you know what happens to the table tennis ball when it hits the table without spinning. Same thing should happen to photons. That is how Newton explained  the phenomenon considering light as consisting of particles. He called them corpuscles. But photon is not an ordinary particle in bulk. It is supposed to have dual nature. Its total energy is equal h multiplied by some frequency which is a wave characteristic. Ordinary particle can have all velocities ranging from zero to velocity of light. But photons move with only one  velocity. So in case of bulky table tennis balls we say that they follow these rules of reflection which can be derived from mechanics but lose their little kinetic energy to the table and as sound. In case of photons this is not possible. So we say that if a bunch of photons are incident on a polished surface, there exists a maximum probability of following the laws of reflection, but the probability of the photon getting absorbed or getting scattered in any other direction is vey low but not zero. Similar expalnation can be thought of following the hypothesis that light is electromagnetic wave then we have to take the example of the mechanical waves and see how em wave is differen from them.
277032
I assume you are talking about any wave equation, not just a QM probability density function.\n\nIn any case, what do you mean that you have a "different x for every instant t"?  That is not the case.  I suspect you are thinking of travelling along with the crest or trough of a wave.  As t changes, the location of the crest and trough changes, but that is not the only location on the wave.\n\nWhat the wave equation specifies is the magnitude of the wave at *any* location x, at any time t.  So, if you are at a constant location x', the magnitude of the wave will vary periodically in time at that location. If you were a cork on the water, you would bob up and down at your location as the waves passed you. But similarly, if we were to somehow freeze time, and travel up and down our x axis, the magnitude of the wave would vary periodically in space as well.  So now, rather than a cork bobbing on the water, imagine you're on a jet ski that is going across the water so fast, compared to the speed of the waves, that it's almost like the waves aren't moving.  Yet you bob up and down as you cross the waves that lie in your path in space.\n\nHence, the wave varies both in x and t, independently.
812174
I don't quite understand your notation, but here is how I would do this:\nThe general equation is y(x,t) = A sin 2 pi (t/T - x/L), where\nA = amplitude = 0.12 m\nL = wavelength = 0.3 m\nT = period\nThe latter is not given, but you can get it from the wavespeed v, via the formula v=L/T. Hence T = L/V = 0.3/6.4 = 0.0469 s.\nPlug A, L and T in the general equation and compare the result to the expression given in the problem.\nLooking at your expression, I would guess \na = A = 0.12 m \nb = 1/T = 21.3 s^-1\nc = 1/L = 3.33  m^-1
72824
Wave length is often represented by the Greek lower case letter lambda (your stick figure).  Replace that in your equation with "wavelength" or W until it makes sense then substitute lambda back into the equation.  It is just a shorthand notation that scientists have agreed upon (and nothing very magic).  See the link for more.  Good luck.
646637
This question can be answered quite easily, if you can consider this idea: Suppose you have some amount of water which is contained in a tub. You bury your hand inside the water and make some forward movement, obviously, the waves of the water flow directly in one direction. Whereas, if you oppose the motion of these moving waves, by burying another hand of your's and pushing some water against an already moving set of waves of water, the first set of waves defintely will decrease their speed, as being opposed by an other ENERGY. \n               So, considering this example, sound waves' problem can be solved: If you yell against the wind, your sound waves are being OPPOSED, hence their speed slows down, and they tend fade off travelling LESS distance. If the sound is going in the direction of the wind, it will definitely tend to move FASTER(when compared to it, moving against the wind)as it is NOT BEING OPPOSED by any other form of energy. \nThat's it mostly,\ncheers,\nDa Vinci.
141854
Ok, so some people should not be posting answers here.\n\nRadio waves do not pass through all objects.  It depends on two things, the dielectric constant of the object and thus the frequency of the radio wave.\n\nFor example, if you have a conductor (copper, or aluminum or iron) it will reflect the radio waves.  The waves will not pass through the object.\n\nFor most objects that are not conductors, when you pass from free space (air) to a solid like concrete, a portion of the radio wave will reflect off the surface (a small portion), some of the energy of the wave will be absorbed by the object, but the rest of the wave will pass through. \n\nDepending on the thickness of the material and the frequency of the signal, and the dielectric constant of the material, sometimes radio waves will not pass through the object.  As the signal travels through the material, it will continuously lose active power (heat) and reactive power (stored energy like in a capacitor).\n\nIf you were to compare the signal strength before it hits the wall, and the signal strength after it leaves the other side of the wall, some energy would have been lost.
827543
The equations involved are:\na) freq*wavelength = velocity of wave\nb) energy of radiation E = h*freq, where h is Plank's constant.\nYou can work out from these that the choice should be a.
1163669
Ocean Waves are mechanical waves that propagate along the interface between water and air; the restoring force is provided by gravity, and so they are often referred to as surface gravity waves. As the wind blows, pressure and friction forces perturb the equilibrium of the ocean surface. These forces transfer energy from the air to the water, forming waves. In the case of monochromatic linear plane waves in deep water, particles near the surface move in circular paths, making ocean surface waves a combination of longitudinal (back and forth) and transverse (up and down) wave motions. When waves propagate in shallow water, (where the depth is less than half the wavelength) the particle trajectories are compressed into ellipses. As the wave amplitude (height) increases, the particle paths no longer form closed orbits; rather, after the passage of each crest, particles are displaced a little forward from their previous positions, a phenomenon known as Stokes drift. A good illustration of the wave motion is given by *Prof. Robert Dalrymple Java applet
913737
In physics it is acoustics.
827091
Hi. I think it deals more with the interaction of radiation with particles (or a particle) than with speed. At any non-relativistic speed (less than .1 'c' say) the wavelength would not be infinite or unbounded. Just my opinion.
283261
A BEAM of particles behaves like a wave\nas you know. The wavelength is h/mv.  (De Broglie)\nInteresting is your question: do moving partikels create a wave? I cannot say yes or no. I will think about it very carefully. fd_r@yahoo.com\n\nAdded later. You suggest space/time is waving.\nTo me space and time are nothing physically. It is only fantasy in man’s brain and it works usefully.\nEinstein is talking about curved space. I cannot imagine that. I can only understand curved matter like a rubber ball and a standing wave in a string of a guitar. I cannot grab space and bend it.\nIn the same way I cannot visualise the concept of an oscillation of space, so an oscillation of nothing.\nMore acceptable for me is an electromagnetic wave as a cluster of oscillations of the electric and magnetic field.\nI do not reject your concept of waving space/time. I only cannot imagine. Maybe I am too simply minded. Maybe with waving space/time there is a field, not electromagnetic, because a beam of neutrons shows wave behaviour as well. What kind of field? Gravitational? I do not know.
124894
a push wave in which the particles move in the same direction to that of the wave as opposed to transverse wave in which they move vertical to the wave direction
27171
Its actually derived from Maxwell's Wave Equations, see source. Its too complex and requires mathematic symbols, so I can't type it here.
571847
Two traveling waves which exist in the same medium will interfere with each other. If their amplitudes add, the interference is said to be constructive interference, and destructive interference if they are "out of phase" and subtract. Patterns of destructive and constructive interference may lead to "dead spots" and "live spots" in auditorium acoustics.\n\nInterference of incident and reflected waves is essential to the production of resonant standing waves.\n\nInterference has far reaching consequences in sound because of the production of "beats" between two frequencies which interfere with each other. \n\nDiffraction: the bending of waves around small obstacles and the spreading out of waves beyond small openings.\n\nRefraction is the bending of waves when they enter a medium where their speed is different. Refraction is not so important a phenomena with sound as it is with light where it is responsible for image formation by lenses, the eye, cameras, etc. But bending of sound waves does occur and is an interesting phenomena in sound\n\nWhen a vehicle with a siren passes you, a noticeable drop in the pitch of the sound of the siren will be observed as the vehicle passes. This is an example of the Doppler effect. An approaching source moves closer during period of the sound wave so the effective wavelength is shortened, giving a higher pitch since the velocity of the wave is unchanged. Similarly the pitch of a receding sound source will be lowered.\n\nLight in the form of a plane wave in space is said to be linearly polarized. Light is a transverse electromagnetic wave, but natural light is generally unpolarized, all planes of propagation being equally probable. If light is composed of two plane waves of equal amplitude by differing in phase by 90°, then the light is said to be circularly polarized. If two plane waves of differing amplitude are related in phase by 90°, or if the relative phase is other than 90° then the light is said to be elliptically polarized.