Phase angle and Phase in Simple harmonic motion

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the differences in terminology used in Indonesian and international physics textbooks regarding simple harmonic motion. The Indonesian books differentiate between "phase angle" (θ = ωt + θ0) and "phase" (φ = t/T + θ0/2π), while the international book uses φ for both concepts. This distinction is deemed idiosyncratic but not incorrect, as both notations convey the same mathematical principles. The consensus is that understanding these differences is crucial for students, as various textbooks may adopt different conventions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of simple harmonic motion equations
  • Familiarity with phase angle and phase concepts in physics
  • Knowledge of angular units (degrees and radians)
  • Basic grasp of wave mechanics and terminology
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the differences between phase angle and phase in wave mechanics
  • Explore various textbooks on simple harmonic motion for comparative terminology
  • Study the implications of different notations in physics education
  • Learn about the mathematical representation of waves and their properties
USEFUL FOR

Physics educators, students studying simple harmonic motion, and anyone interested in the nuances of physics terminology across different educational resources.

Yoseph Santoso
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
I'm a teacher at a Senior High School in Indonesia. I have two Senior High School physics books (Indonesian book) written about simple harmonic motion formula:

y = A sin θ = A sin (ωt + θ0) = A sin 2πφ = A sin 2π (t/T + θ0/2π)
phase angle = θ = ωt + θ0
phase of wave = φ = t/T + θ0/2π​

But I have another book, a university student physics book (International book), written:

y = A sin (ωt + φ)
phase angle = phase of wave = φ​

Are there some things wrong with my Indonesian Senior High School books? Or maybe the writers have a purpose that I haven't known yet? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is just different notation. What the international book calls ##\phi## the Indonesian book is calling ##\theta_0##. There is nothing inherently wrong or right with either choice, although I think the notation used by the international book is more common. At least, it is the notation used in the books I studied.
 
Thanks for your reply Dale.
I mean not for the symbol or notation φ with θ0 , Dale. My Indonesian book differentiate phase angle and phase itself. Phase angle = ωt + θ0 (in degree or radian unit) and phase = t/T + θ0/2π (doesn't have any unit).
Are "phase angle" and "phase" of the wave considered as exactly the same or different?
 
In that usage phase is in units of cycles and phase angle is in units of radians. It’s a little idiosyncratic, but not wrong.

If you want to use the Indonesian book for some reason I think it is OK. You may just want to prepare your students for the future to know that different textbooks use different conventions. The math is the same, just the labels are different.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Yoseph Santoso
Okay I see. I think maybe that Indonesian books writers want to make easy the readers to understand the phase "angle" that mostly refer to degree or radian unit. Do you think so?
 
In relations like ##y = \sin(\omega t+\phi)## the college-level introductory physics textbooks here in the US usually refer to ##\phi## as the phase angle and sometimes ##(\omega t+\phi)## as the phase.
 
I’ll add my vote. In my experience when someone says “phase” I usually expect them to mean “phase angle” in angular units, not fractions of a wavelength.

On the other hand I will say that in some contexts we will discuss phase errors and then say “A is 1/4 wave ahead of B” or something like that. However we explicitly say “wave” so everyone understands the units, and although we may be discussing phase we don’t often explicitly call the “waves” the “phase” in the same sentence.

No hard rule either way though. All that really matters is that everyone understands your choice.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale
Simple harmonic motion is not the description of a wave. There is no Wavelength involved as nothing progressed. This thread is not discussing its actual title.
The expression for a wave has time and distance terms in it. There can also be a constant term to describe the offset or phase. That constant can either represent a change of time origin or distance origin.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
9K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
15K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K