How do nodes on a string produce tension if they are stationary?

AI Thread Summary
Nodes on a string remain stationary despite the presence of tension because they are points where two waves cancel each other out, creating a standing wave. The tension in the string is a result of electrostatic forces between particles, which remain under tension even when oscillating. While energy does not pass through the nodes, it flows past them as waves travel in both directions, contributing to the overall oscillation. The tension is consistent in magnitude along the string but varies in direction, allowing for the transmission of forces. Thus, even stationary nodes play a crucial role in the dynamics of a vibrating string.
bob900
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
The vibration in a string is caused by the tension force on point masses inside the string :

23ih4wg.png


The tension force itself results from "the net electrostatic attraction between the particles in a solid when it is deformed so that the particles are further apart from each other than when at equilibrium" (source).

But a node in the string (when two waves cancel each other) is stationary. To transmit movement to string masses on either side of the node, shouldn't the node have to move (deform) to produce tension?

For example, in the following picture

2qsxao3.png


At node B, the red wave traveling to the right, has to create tension to transmit its upward to the string mass immediately to the right of B. Analogously, the green wave has to create tension to transmit its downward movement to the string mass on the left of B. But if the mass element at B itself does not move, how are these tension forces produced?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The rope has to have some tension before you start waggling it.

A completely slack string will not oscillate.

Try it and see.
 
Studiot said:
The rope has to have some tension before you start waggling it.

A completely slack string will not oscillate.

Try it and see.

I know that you need tension to start oscillating. What I'm asking is that when it is oscillating already, how is force/tension/anything transmitted through the stationary nodes, if they don't move at all? On a microscopic, electrostatic force level.
 
What I'm asking is that when it is oscillating already, how is force/tension/anything transmitted through the stationary nodes,

As I indicated a vibrating string is already under tension throughout.

Energy does not pass a node. That is why this type of wave is called a stationary (or standing) wave.

The force of tension is a vector.
The theory of small oscillations assumes the tension does not vary in magnitude along the string, just in direction.
 
Studiot said:
As I indicated a vibrating string is already under tension throughout.

Energy does not pass a node. That is why this type of wave is called a stationary (or standing) wave.

The force of tension is a vector.
The theory of small oscillations assumes the tension does not vary in magnitude along the string, just in direction.

Energy is flowing past each node - it's just that energy is being carried in both directions by two progressive waves, which add up to a standing wave. You need to remember that the (extra) tension in the string varies from zero to a maximum during each half of the oscillation.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top