Inverse Power Law: Solve for Power at 400m

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of the inverse power law to calculate power loss from a cell tower at varying distances. The user attempts to determine the power at 400m using an inverse 2.5 power law, starting with a known power of 5W at 100m. The calculations presented are correct, yielding a power of approximately 0.15625W at 400m. However, there is confusion regarding the mixing of concepts between radiant power decrease, which typically follows the inverse square law, and the power law, which can have varying exponents based on the scenario.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of inverse power laws and their applications
  • Familiarity with the concept of radiant power and its decrease with distance
  • Basic knowledge of mathematical exponentiation
  • Contextual knowledge of power loss in urban environments
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the application of the inverse square law in telecommunications
  • Study the 3.5 power law and its relevance in urban signal propagation
  • Learn about the differences between radiant power and power law concepts
  • Explore practical examples of power loss calculations in city environments
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics or telecommunications, engineers working on signal propagation models, and anyone interested in understanding power loss in urban settings.

mrdman
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
If the power at 100m is 5W, using inverse 2.5 power law, find the power at 400m.
Relevant Equations
1 / d ^ x
Hi everyone! Awesome forum!
I'm doubting myself on a problem about inverse square law.
I'll change the actual values from my homework problem as I want to check that I have the right idea rather than the specific numeric answer.

If I am using an inverse 2.5 power law and know the power at 100m is 5W.. If I want to find out the power at 400m, is the following correct...?

100m: 5W
200m: 5 * 1/2 ^ 2.5
300m: 5 * 1/3 ^ 2.5
400m: 5 * 1/4 ^ 2.5

So the answer will be: 5 * (0.25)^2.5
Which is 5 * 0.03125 = 0.15625W

I've had three attempts so far and keep getting varying answers each time!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks right to me.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mrdman
Awesome! Many thanks.
 
mrdman said:
Homework Statement: If the power at 100m is 5W, using inverse 2.5 power law, find the power at 400m.
Homework Equations: 1 / d ^ x

If I am using an inverse 2.5 power law
Sorry for my dumb question, but this seems a bit confusing to me. There are two kinds of "power" that seem to be getting mixed in this question.

There is the decrease in radiant power from a source, which varies as the inverse of the distance squared (not to the power 2.5).

And there is the "power law" which refers to when a quantity varies with a constant exponent relationship:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_law
1566568375054.png


The constant exponent does not have to be "2" in general, and varies depending on the phenomena being described by the equation.

To me, it is very confusing to mix both concepts together in this question. It implies that somehow radiant power can drop off by the exponent 2.5 instead of 2. In the far field at least, I don't think that can happen. Can it?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2
Hi.. I'm not 100% sure but it may help if I explained the context in which I am doing this calculation.
It is regarding power loss from a cell tower in a city environment. In this environment inverse square law doesn't work out in practice (city obstacles etc) so we were told to use 3.5 power law (I may be getting my terms mixed up. Is it called 3.5 power law?) Above in my example I changed it to 2.5 and changed all the values so I didn't get help with the specific answer, but rather the concept of how to solve it.

Hope that helps and I've not mixed up terms too much.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 138 ·
5
Replies
138
Views
8K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
8K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K