Adjusting Air Column Length with Water: Why No Waves?

AI Thread Summary
In air column experiments, water is used to adjust the air column length, but most sound waves reflect back into the air rather than passing into the water. While some sound energy is absorbed by the water, the majority is reflected due to the impedance difference between air and water. The open end of the air column loses more energy than the closed end, which affects the formation of standing waves. Sound waves inherently lose energy through various processes, including dispersion and heat. Maintaining standing waves requires a continuous input of energy to compensate for these losses.
atavistic
Messages
105
Reaction score
0
In many problems , to change the length of the air column we use water but I don't understand why waves don't pass into water and then the reflected wave will have less amplitude and hence standing waves could not be formed.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Waves tend to reflect off any interfaces between media, because the different media have a different "impedance." In this situation, you can think get away with thinking of impedance as simple resistance -- water is much harder to shake than is air.

- Warren
 
Ye, but water will absorb also right?
 
Yes, some of the sound will enter the water. If you're swimming underwater and a bomb goes off in the air above, you'll hear it! :smile:

But most of the sound is reflected back into the air.

In air column experiments like you describe, much more energy is lost at the open end of the column than at the closed (water) end. After all, some of the sound has to come out the open end so we can hear it.
 
By the way I believe that there are no waves existing that reflect of an object without loosing any energy, particularly with soundwaves which loose their energy to the traverse wave, and to dispersion and heat. The standing wave induced by boundaries can only be maintained by continuously providing amplitude to the insident wave, so the loss can be overcome.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top