Harmonic waves

  • #1
What is the difference between propagation number(K) and wave number(k) described in Optics book written by hecht

He defined K=2π/λ and k=1/λ and both of them have the same units (i.e, meter inverse)
What does wave number of a Harmonic function tells about?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
olivermsun
Science Advisor
1,244
118
The units look the same, but they aren't quite the same. It's a somewhat confusing notation in my opinion (especially when you use 'K' and 'k'!)

K=2π/λ is in units of radians/m and k=1/λ has units cycles/m, where "radians" and "cycles" are usually omitted. You just have to remember which kind of units you're using, so you know whether there needs to be a factor of 2π inside the sine/cosine/exponential.

For example, a wave of "propagation number(K)" would be sin(Kx), while a wave with "wave number(k)" would be sin(2πkx).
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #3
jtbell
Mentor
15,666
3,738
[Hecht] defined [propagation number] K=2π/λ and [wave number] k=1/λ
You have it backwards. He defines the propagation number as ##k = 2 \pi / \lambda## (lower-case Latin letter "k") and the wave number as ##\kappa = 1 / \lambda## (lower-case Greek letter "kappa", not upper-case Latin letter "K"). Those different symbols (##k##, ##\kappa##, and ##K## in LaTeX; or k, κ, and K in PF's default font) tend to confuse people. Look carefully! :smile:

As olivermsun noted, the units are different. ##k## is much more commonly used. ##\kappa## is mainly used by spectroscopists. I don't know if they have a practical reason for it, or if it's just a historical convention.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #4
olivermsun
Science Advisor
1,244
118
The ##k = 2 \pi / \lambda## version is often convenient for working with waves when you also use the angular frequency ##\omega = 2 \pi / T## (where ##T## is the wave period).

That way, you can write things like ##e^{i(kx - \omega t)}## without having ##2\pi##s all over the place. :smile:
 
  • #5
jtbell
Mentor
15,666
3,738
That way, you can write things like ##e^{i(kx - \omega t)}## without having ##2\pi##s all over the place. :smile:
Exactly. The OP (manimaran1605) should compare equation (2.24) in Hecht with the other equations in that group on page 16, which are different ways of writing the same wave equation using different combinations of constants.
 

Related Threads on Harmonic waves

  • Last Post
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
661
  • Last Post
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
8K
Replies
1
Views
6K
Top