Angular frequency descriptive term

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the search for a descriptive term for an angular frequency consistently equal to 2Pi, varying only by tens multiples or divisions. It explores the relationship between this angular frequency and its corresponding wavelength, suggesting that such values could be termed "generic angular frequency" and "generic wavelength." The conversation highlights the distinction between frequency and angular frequency, particularly in the context of converting to wavelength, where "angular wavelength" is defined as normal wavelength divided by 2Pi. The participants acknowledge the complexity of the topic and the lack of established terminology for these concepts. Ultimately, the discussion leads to a realization about the mathematical relationships involved, providing clarity on the subject.
FrankMak
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Is there a descriptive term for an angular frequency that is always equal to 2Pi, differing only by a tens multiple or division?

Equivalently, is there a descriptive term for the wavelength associated with the above value. Dividing any tens multiple or division of 2Pi into the speed of light produces a numeric value of 4771345... differing only in decimal point placement.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Angular frequency has units of radians per second, or s^{-1}

Are you thinking of the term harmonic?
 
No, not a harmonic, only tens multiples or divisions. Angular frequency is the descriptive term to describe "any" result that is arrived at using 2Pi x freq.

As a frequency, any result that gives a tens multiple or division of 2Pi is essentially a "generic angular frequency" for a wave. If you start out with an angular frequency where the frequency is "one", that value can represent any full wave regardless of its length. If I start adding a tens multiplier to the 2Pi value and convert that to a wavelength, I get a "base" wavelength for any wavelength in that tens range.

As a frequency, when 2Pi or any tens multiple or division of that value converted to a wavelength gives a numeric value of 47713... differing only in decimal point. The 47713... value might be construed as a "generic wavelength".

There isn't a defintion for a "generic angular frequency", or for a "generic wavelength". I want to know if there are existing descriptive terms that describe that particular frequency and wavelength relationship.
 
I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. A factor of 10 is called a decade, and it's common to think in terms of decades when dealing with frequency on a log scale.
 
When you mentioned that it is usual to think of frequency in terms of decades I realized that I have to distinguish between frequency and angular frequency when I convert to wavelength, one giving "normal" wavelength and the other "angular wavelength".

The definition for "angular wavelength" is dividing normal wavelength by 2Pi.

http://vip.ocsnet.net/~ancient/Freq-AngularFreq.pdf"

After going in circles on this for awhile you made me realize I was in an erroneous mental logic loop.

I recall a quote from a book, "Boltzmanns Atom", where Neils Bohr is quoted saying to Einstein, "No, No, you are not thinking, you are just being logical."

I think you have helped me solve a several thousand year old mathematical problem. I thank you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Very basic question. Consider a 3-terminal device with terminals say A,B,C. Kirchhoff Current Law (KCL) and Kirchhoff Voltage Law (KVL) establish two relationships between the 3 currents entering the terminals and the 3 terminal's voltage pairs respectively. So we have 2 equations in 6 unknowns. To proceed further we need two more (independent) equations in order to solve the circuit the 3-terminal device is connected to (basically one treats such a device as an unbalanced two-port...
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
Back
Top