Why Do Water Particles Move in Circular Paths in Waves?

AI Thread Summary
Water particles in waves move in circular paths due to the interplay of gravitational and inertial forces acting on them. This circular motion allows for the transfer of energy through the water, leading to wave propagation after a disturbance occurs. When the water level rises in one area, it necessitates the flow of water from adjacent regions to maintain equilibrium. The circular motion contrasts with vertical movement seen in other wave types, like ropes, due to the unique properties of fluid dynamics. Understanding these mechanics is essential for grasping water wave behavior and its implications in hydrodynamics.
Mårten
Messages
126
Reaction score
1
Why do the water particles in a water wave, move in circular paths? What's the exact mechanics behind that motion? See this page for a nice pic of the motion:

http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/Demos/waves/wavemotion.html#water

Also, why does this motion, ultimately lead to a propagation of a wave, once a disturbance has occured?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
In short: in order for the water level in one spot to rise, water must flow in from nearby.
 
russ_watters said:
In short: in order for the water level in one spot to rise, water must flow in from nearby.
Okey. But why circular? Why not just vertical like in a rope? And what pushes the water, leading to this flow?

tankFan86 said:
Check out Svendsen's http://books.google.com/books?id=g7...hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result". He has several excellent selections on water wave theory.
Ouh, pretty advanced stuff. Didn't make me much wiser at the topic...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
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