Microwaves through an ice sphere: Which scattering solution is best?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a high school project involving the transmission of microwaves through an ice sphere, exploring the complexities of scattering. The researcher seeks clarity on whether to apply Rayleigh or Mie scattering theories, given the ice's absorption of electromagnetic waves. There is confusion regarding the relevance of inelastic scattering processes in this context. The researcher anticipates that the significant absorption by ice will play a crucial role in their findings. Ultimately, the inquiry aims to determine the most appropriate theoretical framework for predicting scattering behavior in this experiment.
DarkLightA
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I apologize for not following the template, but it doesn't really fit. I would have posted it elsewhere but as it's for academic purposes I think it has to be here. Please excuse me if I'm wrong.

I'm a high schooler working on a project, and I was planning to send ≈3 cm microwaves through an ice sphere with diameter varying from about 1-6 cm and see the change in scattering.

Unfortunately, through the research I've done it seems like this is way more complicated than I'd imagined.

So, I need some help.

Wikipedia (Most reliable source... Well...) states:
Major forms of elastic light scattering (involving negligible energy transfer) are Rayleigh scattering and Mie scattering. Inelastic scattering includes Brillouin scattering, Raman scattering, inelastic X-ray scattering and Compton scattering.

And this confuses me. I know ice absorbs some EM waves, and thus it must be somewhat inelastic. However, I'm not sure whether that's what is meant.

Can someone help me with which I should use, and why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


The wavelength is so long, effects from the whole material should be more relevant than those inelastic scattering processes. I would expect significant absorption.

I think classical physics was the right subforum ;).
 


Huh, okay. Does this mean I can use something like the Mie Theory to predict scattering, or not?
 

Thread 'Errors and significant figures'

I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
View full post »
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Difference between Scattering and Emission of Photons
Replies
25
Views
12K
Thermal Emission and Scattering (Mie or Rayleigh)
Replies
3
Views
2K
How Does Gauss's Law Apply to the Flux Through a Cube Near a Charged Sphere?
Replies
8
Views
5K
Angular Velocity of a swinging Sphere
Replies
3
Views
5K
Rotating sphere which separates into hemispheres
Replies
9
Views
2K
Schools How well does this course prepare me for college math?
Replies
10
Views
5K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top