How Long for Wave Amplitude to Decrease by a Factor of e?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a wave described by a complex amplitude that varies with time and space. The original poster seeks to understand how long it takes for the wave's amplitude to decrease by a factor of e, given a specific form of the wave equation involving a complex wavenumber.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the meaning of 'spatially constant amplitude' and its implications for wave behavior. There are attempts to relate the wave's decay to its medium and to derive a suitable wave function. Questions arise about the role of the wavenumber and the correct form of the wave equation, particularly regarding time dependence.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering insights into the nature of wave propagation and decay. Some have suggested using complex exponentials to represent the wave, while others are questioning the initial conditions and the relationship between spatial and temporal dependencies. A typo in the original question has been acknowledged, which may influence the discussion moving forward.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted confusion regarding the initial conditions and the correct formulation of the wave equation, particularly the time dependence that was initially overlooked. Participants are also considering the constraints imposed by the medium on wave propagation.

knowlewj01
Messages
100
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A wave is driven at z=0 with constant real frequency ωr propagates in the z direction, for z>0 the amplitude varies as:

A = A_0 e^{i\omega_r - ikz}

where k is complex
k=k_r - i k_i

if a wave with spatially constant amplitude and purely real wavenumber kr were excited in the same medium, how long would pass before the wave's amplitude decreased by a factor of e?



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



(I'm not too sure what is meant by 'spatially constant')

does anyone know where to start on this one? I've tried a few things like removing the i from ikz, removing the z dependence altogether, I'm having trouble picturing what's going on.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
if a wave has spatially constant amplitude, means its amplitude is a constant and independent of space directional variables.

now any wave that decays, does so due to some restrain which is put on it from its medium by some means; so we must seek a decaying solution that satisfies the above wave propagation equation, where the amplitude decays as a result of the given equation of waves for the medium.
 
The simplest waveform i can think of that has constant amplitude is

x = x_0 cos(\omega t)

but wouldn't a decay indicate behaviour more like

x = x_0 e^{-\frac{t}{\tau}}cos(\omega t)

but then how does the wavenumber come into it?
 
that expression is very correct, but the incorrect approach to solve the problem, try writing the wave function in complex exponential notation and insert the wave number with the imaginary part in there.
 
Your simplest waveform has not only spatially constant amplitude but in fact has no spatial (x) dependence at all (it doesn't propagate!).

Think about the "excited wave" as an initial condition for a general wave propagating in the medium and then think about the disturbance evolves in time.

As ardie pointed out, complex exponentials are your friend.
 
x=x_0 e^{i\omega t - ikz} \hat{x}

is the general form of a plane wave, this would propagate in the z direction with constant amplitude. correct?

so initially the wavevector is complex, k = kr - i ki

when the wavevector is only real, such that k = kr

x_i = x_0e^{i\omega t - (ik_r + k_i)z}
x_f = x_0e^{i\omega t - ik_rz}

im going to eliminate t if i carry on this way. is this any closer?
 
You know that the wave amplitude must have both space and time dependence, since they tell you the spatial dependence and they ask you about the time dependence. Thus you might conclude that your wave must have a form like x = A(z,t) exp(iωt - ikz).

Your first expression tells you the decay of the wave amplitude as it propagates in the +z direction, but notice that the expression has no time dependence. You also have an initial condition which tells you what the original amplitude and wavenumber are (what is t at the initial condition?). So how do you get the time dependence of a wave if you know the spatial dependence?
 
ive just noticed i made a typo in the question

A = A_0e^{i\omega_r - ikz}

should read

A = A_0e^{i\omega_rt - ikz}

so there should be a time dependance.

sorry
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K