Please help me understand how transverse waves reflect at a boundary

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding the reflection of transverse waves at a boundary, particularly why waves invert upon reflection at a hard boundary. The student struggles with the explanation that involves the interaction between particles of different media, questioning why the wave doesn't flatten out at the midpoint. Clarifications highlight that inertia allows the wave to continue moving past the midpoint, leading to the formation of a reflected wave. The conversation also touches on the importance of energy conservation and relative density in predicting wave behavior, suggesting that simulations can help visualize these concepts. Ultimately, the student begins to grasp the mechanics of wave reflection and the role of forces in these interactions.
constant_puzzlement
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hello, I am a student who is trying to learn some physics independently so I apologize in advance if I am not making sense. I have studied physics a bit in school but nothing very rigorous and it is a subject that I have trouble with, especially waves.

This is what I have been reading: https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/waves/Lesson-3/Boundary-Behavior
The explanation for why the wave inverts at the hard boundary is: "As the last particle of medium A pulls upwards on the first particle of medium B, the first particle of medium B pulls downwards on the last particle of medium A." But I do not understand this explanation because if B pulls on A the same amount as A pulls on B then wouldn't B stop pulling on A when A gets to the midpoint? Then you would end up with a flat string.

Something like this question (https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/reflection-of-waves-and-formation-of-standing-waves.844915/) I think kind of gets at the question I am asking but it is unanswered and has been for a while. I have been looking around for a physical explanation for this behavior (preferably with something like force diagrams) but I have not found any. Am I going about this the wrong way? Is it not possible to use this kind of physical intuition for waves/is the wave equation the only way to predict the behavior of waves?
 
Science news on Phys.org
constant_puzzlement said:
...wouldn't B stop pulling on A when A gets to the midpoint?
Yes, but that doesn't stop A immediately at the midpoint because of inertia.
 
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur and constant_puzzlement
constant_puzzlement said:
Summary:: Confused about mechanism by which waves flip polarity with a hard boundary (visualizing with force diagrams)

Hello, I am a student who is trying to learn some physics independently so I apologize in advance if I am not making sense. I have studied physics a bit in school but nothing very rigorous and it is a subject that I have trouble with, especially waves.

This is what I have been reading: https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/waves/Lesson-3/Boundary-Behavior
The explanation for why the wave inverts at the hard boundary is: "As the last particle of medium A pulls upwards on the first particle of medium B, the first particle of medium B pulls downwards on the last particle of medium A." But I do not understand this explanation because if B pulls on A the same amount as A pulls on B then wouldn't B stop pulling on A when A gets to the midpoint? Then you would end up with a flat string.

Something like this question (https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/reflection-of-waves-and-formation-of-standing-waves.844915/) I think kind of gets at the question I am asking but it is unanswered and has been for a while. I have been looking around for a physical explanation for this behavior (preferably with something like force diagrams) but I have not found any. Am I going about this the wrong way? Is it not possible to use this kind of physical intuition for waves/is the wave equation the only way to predict the behavior of waves?
Maybe look first at a longitudinal wave. I think we can say that the last particle hits the wall and bounces back. So its velocity reverses and it exerts a large force at the point of collision. Maybe the last particle of the transverse wave does the same.
 
  • Like
Likes constant_puzzlement
A.T. said:
Yes, but that doesn't stop A immediately at the midpoint because of inertia.
Oh okay, so B exerts a downwards force on A, and then A continues traveling downwards because of inertia and by doing so it starts the reflected wave? I think I am still a bit confused though because it seems like when the reflected wave is formed, wouldn't A pull on B again causing B to exert an upwards force on A which would make another reflected wave? This doesn't happen so I must be misunderstanding something.
Thank you for helping me out.

tech99 said:
Maybe look first at a longitudinal wave. I think we can say that the last particle hits the wall and bounces back. So its velocity reverses and it exerts a large force at the point of collision. Maybe the last particle of the transverse wave does the same.
Oh, I hadn't thought of that. I'll have to think about this some more, thank you.
 
Last edited:
Hopefully , the following visualization with balls connected with string will help:
 
constant_puzzlement said:
I think I am still a bit confused though because it seems like when the reflected wave is formed, wouldn't A pull on B again causing B to exert an upwards force on A which would make another reflected wave?
A is pulled up by B at some point, but when it starts to move up it is also pulled down by the 2nd last particle, which now lower. So A doesn't go above the neutral level.

Here is another video with some explanations:

 
  • Like
Likes constant_puzzlement
constant_puzzlement said:
Oh okay, so B exerts a downwards force on A, and then A continues traveling downwards because of inertia and by doing so it starts the reflected wave? I think I am still a bit confused though because it seems like when the reflected wave is formed, wouldn't A pull on B again causing B to exert an upwards force on A which would make another reflected wave? This doesn't happen so I must be misunderstanding something.
Thank you for helping me out.Oh, I hadn't thought of that. I'll have to think about this some more, thank you.
You have two extreme cases. First, if the second medium is the same as the first, then the wave continues unchanged . At the other extreme, if the second medium is so dense it is essentially fixed, then you have a fully reflected inverted wave. All other cases lie between these two extremes. Any explanation, therefore, must involve an element of how the relative density apportions the energy to the transmitted and reflected waves.

PS if you study a simple elastic collision between two objects, where A impacts B.

If A is lighter, then it rebounds and the proportion of energy transmitted to B depends on the ratio of their masses. If they have the same mass then A stops and transmits all its energy to B.

I suggest something analagous is happening with these waves.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes constant_puzzlement
PeroK said:
You have two extreme cases. First, if the second medium is the same as the first, then the wave continues unchanged . At the other extreme, if the second medium is so dense it is essentially fixed,
One could also say the extreme cases are:
density ratio (medium2/medium1) -> 0 (string end free to move)
density ratio (medium2/medium1) -> infinity (string end fixed)

And your first case is in the middle:
density ratio (medium2/medium1) = 1 (string doesn't end)

In both extreme cases there is total reflection. In the middle case there is no reflection at all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes constant_puzzlement
A.T. said:
A is pulled up by B at some point, but when it starts to move up it is also pulled down by the 2nd last particle, which now lower. So A doesn't go above the neutral level.

Here is another video with some explanations:
Thank you! I think I am starting to get it now. One last thing, please let me know if I have come to the right conclusions. In the fixed end case A's velocity reverses and in the free end case A moves to twice the original height of the wave, so that should mean at the boundary it experiences a force that is 2 times stronger than the initial force needed to start the wave, I think. But I don't think that there is any way to predict this from looking only at forces which is why some people trying to explain the behavior of a wave on a string do so in terms of energy conservation... As far as I can tell the wave equation based explanations that people give are all based on first stating the behavior of the wave and then finding a solution that fits that observed behavior which is not quite what I was looking for in terms of an "explanation".

PeroK said:
You have two extreme cases. First, if the second medium is the same as the first, then the wave continues unchanged . At the other extreme, if the second medium is so dense it is essentially fixed, then you have a fully reflected inverted wave. All other cases lie between these two extremes. Any explanation, therefore, must involve an element of how the relative density apportions the energy to the transmitted and reflected waves.

PS if you study a simple elastic collision between two objects, where A impacts B.

If A is lighter, then it rebounds and the proportion of energy transmitted to B depends on the ratio of their masses. If they have the same mass then A stops and transmits all its energy to B.

I suggest something analagous is happening with these waves.

I see, thank you for giving me another way to think about this system, it is really helpful! :)
 
  • #10
constant_puzzlement said:
But I don't think that there is any way to predict this from looking only at forces...
Of course there is. Some of the animations you find of this are actually simulations based on a mass-spring system. This is predicting the behavior based on forces.
 
  • Like
Likes Merlin3189
  • #11
A.T. said:
Of course there is. Some of the animations you find of this are actually simulations based on a mass-spring system. This is predicting the behavior based on forces.
Oh... Well in that case would you happen to know of any such simulations that allow you to view the code?
Sorry, it's very difficult for me to wrap my head around this for some reason.
 
  • #12
constant_puzzlement said:
Oh... Well in that case would you happen to know of any such simulations that allow you to view the code?
Sorry, it's very difficult for me to wrap my head around this for some reason.
A mass-spring system is a set of masses that are connected by elements generating distance dependent forces, and simulated by integration of Newton's Laws.
 
  • #13
constant_puzzlement said:
in that case would you happen to know of any such simulations that allow you to view the code?
I can sympathise with you here. The problem is that "the code" and a simulation don't show the pattern in the same way that the equations do. To make sense of "the code" you would have to reverse-engineer it and get the equations in any case. There are many Google hits for a search about reflection coefficient and boundary. This one shows the result near the end.
 
  • #14
sophiecentaur said:
I can sympathise with you here. The problem is that "the code" and a simulation don't show the pattern in the same way that the equations do. To make sense of "the code" you would have to reverse-engineer it and get the equations in any case.
If I understand @constant_puzzlement correctly, the aim is to play around with the simulation, and look at the forces at specific time points, to get a better understanding on how the string parts are interacting. For this I would recommend building the string in a simple simulation tool like Algodoo. It allows you to visualize the vectors for force, acceleration, velocity for each particle.

http://www.algodoo.com/

Here is an example of a string build with Algodoo:

Here a different simulation with more complex cases:



More info in this paper:
http://www.sbfisica.org.br/rbef/pdf/334306.pdf
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes PeroK
Back
Top