Is sine*sine a form of a standing wave?

deadlytrogdor
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
What kind of wave is Asin(kx)sin(wt)?

Using trig functions, I've rewritten it as

Bcos(kx-wt) - Bcos(kx+wt)

So it sort of looks like it's a standing wave in that it's a superposition of two waves traveling in opposite directions with equal amplitude and wavelength, yet I'm unsure since it seems like the two waves would be canceling each other out perfectly.

So what is it? :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You seem like you're on the right track. What do you mean they would be canceling each other out perfectly? You already saw that the equation could be written in terms of w(x,t)=Asin(kx)sin(wt), which is not 0. Also, I guess you're using a new factor B, but be sure to keep track of your factors of 2.
 
Okay. I guess I just wasn't thinking about this correctly graphically--I was thrown off by the minus sign instead of the plus sign.

So, just to be perfectly clear, it is then a standing wave, based off of what I said originally, correct?

Was it necessary for me to get it into the cos-cos form to see that it is a superposition of two waves, or is there a way to tell from the sin*sin equation that it is a standing wave? If it was like sin(kx)cos(wt) or something like that, I would have recognized it, but the sin*sin throws me off a bit.
 
Last edited:
Granted, standing waves are can be produced by interference, but I'd say the original equation describes it as a standing wave a bit better. You have a term that depends on frequency and time (wt), and you have a spatial term that will give nodes and antinodes. It's the spatial term that makes this a standing wave. It could be sin or cos.

sin(kx)cos(wt)=sin(kx)sin(wt+pi/2)=sin(2*pi/(lambda)*x)sin(wt+pi/2)

if x = lambda ± n*lambda/2 you have a node, I'll leave it to you to see how the antinodes would go

Maybe helpful
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/waves/standw.html
 
excellent, thanks!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top