How to re-size a sound's wave length

  • Thread starter Thread starter BioMedPhD
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Length Wave
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the relationship between wavelength, speed of sound, and frequency in acoustical physics, emphasizing that wavelength increases with speed while frequency remains constant. It highlights that to increase the speed of sound and thus the wavelength, a sound wave must transition from one medium to another, such as from air to water. This transition causes the leading edge of the pressure wave to advance more quickly than the trailing edge, resulting in a stretched wavelength. The frequency of the sound source does not change during this process, maintaining a consistent rate of pressure variations. Ultimately, changes in wavelength occur at the boundaries between different materials.
BioMedPhD
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
In the field of acoustical physics the mathematical relationship (wavelength (lambda) = speed of sound (velocity) / frequency (cycles per sec)) indicates that lambda (wavelength) would increase if the speed of sound were increased while the frequency (cps) is held constant (e.g., 100 Hz).

Setting aside (for the moment) the empirical issues surrounding how one increases the speed of sound while holding frequency constant, my question relates to understanding the pressure mechanics that would have to underlie such an increase in wavelength.

I’m looking for an intuitive physical explanation that starts with the idea that wave length describes the distance required for the pattern of pressure increases (condensation) and decreases (rarefaction) to repeat its self.

Doesn’t an increase in wave length mean that somewhere in this process the leading edge of the pressure wave must have selectively and spatially jumped forward relative to the trailing wave?

Really ! – How could that happen?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The speed of sound is different in different mediums, so the way to increase the speed of sound and hence the wavelength is to get your sound wave to stop moving through air and start moving through something else instead.

In this case, the leading edge of the pressure wave really does jump ahead relative to the trailing edge. The leading edge is traveling through the air, reaches the surface of the new medium, and starts propagating through the new medium at the new higher speed. Meanwhile, the trailing edge is still traveling through air, so is propagating at the slower speed and falls behind. When the trailing edge reaches the new medium, it also propagates at the faster speed so stops falling behind, but by then the wavelength has already been stretched out.
 
Wavelength changes happen at the boundaries between materials. Frequency never changes. For example, maybe a rock hammer is tapping out a regular beat underwater. It does so with a frequency of say 10 Hz. In the water, the wavelength would then be sound speed / frequency or 150 m (1497/10). Now the energy travels as a disturbance through the water up to the surface. Just because the wave has reached the surface doesn't mean the rock hammer isn't hitting the rock 10 times a second. The frequency is the same. However, since sound speed in air is different, the wavelength changes 331/10 (33 m). These are probably unrealistic numbers but you get the idea. Nothing about the material changes what is happening with the source of the wave (frequency), that would be weird/crazy if it did.
 
Thanks Guys - All your responses agree with my privately held rational - Thanks again
 
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...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top