How Do Lambda and Beta Relate in the Exponential Decay of Foam?

LucasGB
Messages
181
Reaction score
0
Hello,

Suppose you observe some foam. The foam is formed by a set of bubbles, and each bubble blows up after a random time. The density function of the time each bubble will take to blow up is probably exponential, with rate lambda. The total amount of foam (Q) must also decay exponentially, at a rate given by the decay constant beta.

So, we have to exponencial functions:

1) the exponencial density function that determines the lifetime of each individual buble:

f(t) = lambda*exp(-lambda*t)

2) the exponencial decay that determines the amount of foam we have at time t:

Q(t)=Q[0]*exp(-beta*t)

The relation between these two functions is not clear to me. What is the relation between lambda and beta?

Thanks in advance,

Estêvão
 
Physics news on Phys.org
LucasGB said:
Hello,

Suppose you observe some foam. The foam is formed by a set of bubbles, and each bubble blows up after a random time. The density function of the time each bubble will take to blow up is probably exponential, with rate lambda. The total amount of foam (Q) must also decay exponentially, at a rate given by the decay constant beta.

So, we have to exponencial functions:

1) the exponencial density function that determines the lifetime of each individual buble:

f(t) = lambda*exp(-lambda*t)

2) the exponencial decay that determines the amount of foam we have at time t:

Q(t)=Q[0]*exp(-beta*t)

The relation between these two functions is not clear to me. What is the relation between lambda and beta?

Thanks in advance,

Estêvão

The probability that the bubble survives to time t is exp(-lambda*t), so if the number of bubbles is large then by the law of large numbers you'd expect that fraction of the bubbles to have survived.
 
bpet said:
The probability that the bubble survives to time t is exp(-lambda*t), so if the number of bubbles is large then by the law of large numbers you'd expect that fraction of the bubbles to have survived.

So lambda = beta?
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top