Undergrad Interpretation of complex wave number

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the interpretation of the imaginary part of a complex wave number in fluid dynamics and acoustics. It is established that the real part, Re(k_z), corresponds to the energy of the wave and the wavelength, while the imaginary part, Im(k_z), relates to energy dissipation or reduction per unit length. Additionally, it is noted that Im(k_z) can also indicate energy increase in unstable waves, emphasizing that it does not always have to be positive. The relationship between these components is crucial for understanding wave behavior in various contexts. Overall, the conversation highlights the significance of complex wave numbers in analyzing wave dynamics.
MaAl
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Dear forum members,

I'm wondering about the physical meaning of the imaginary part of a complex wave number (e.g., the context of fluid dynamics or acoustics). It is obvious that

w = \hat{w} \mathrm{e}^{i k_z z}

describes an undamped wave if k_z = \Re(k_z) and an evanescent wave if k_z = \Im(k_z).

If k_z = \Re(k_z) is proportional to the energy of the wave, can I interpret
k_z = \Im(k_z) as a kind of dissipation/reduction of energy per length z?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
##\Re(K_z)## is proportional to the wavelength of wave and ##\Im(K_z)## as you say , relates to the energy reduction per length z.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes MaAl
Delta² said:
##\Re(K_z)## is proportional to the wavelength of wave and ##\Im(K_z)## as you say , relates to the energy reduction per length z.

Or energy increase, in the case of an unstable wave. ##\Im(k_z)## needn't be positive.
 
  • Like
Likes MaAl and Delta2
I do not have a good working knowledge of physics yet. I tried to piece this together but after researching this, I couldn’t figure out the correct laws of physics to combine to develop a formula to answer this question. Ex. 1 - A moving object impacts a static object at a constant velocity. Ex. 2 - A moving object impacts a static object at the same velocity but is accelerating at the moment of impact. Assuming the mass of the objects is the same and the velocity at the moment of impact...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K