Sound waves: why do air molecules oscillate?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the oscillation of air molecules and their role in sound wave formation, particularly in response to a drum being struck. Participants clarify that while high school students may visualize air molecules colliding like marbles, the reality involves electromagnetic interactions and the Pauli Exclusion Principle. The speed of sound in air is approximately 330 m/s, and the mean free path of air molecules at atmospheric pressure is about 68 nm. Understanding these concepts is crucial for explaining sound propagation and molecular interactions accurately.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of sound wave propagation and characteristics
  • Familiarity with the Pauli Exclusion Principle
  • Basic knowledge of electromagnetic interactions
  • Concept of mean free path in gases
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of sound wave propagation in gases
  • Explore the Pauli Exclusion Principle and its implications in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about electromagnetic interactions at the atomic level
  • Investigate the concept of mean free path and its significance in gas behavior
USEFUL FOR

Educators, physics students, and anyone interested in the fundamental principles of sound waves and molecular interactions in gases.

  • #31
Nugatory said:
The air molecules aren’t oscillating, the air pressure is oscillating.
The molecules have a huge range of velocities; it's just the average of all the molecules' motions in a local region that's the density (pressure) and motion in the macroscopic sense.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
sophiecentaur said:
The molecules have a huge range of velocities; it's just the average of all the molecules' motions in a local region that's the density (pressure) and motion in the macroscopic sense.
Yes. We plot the pressure at a point and we get a nice sinusoidal function of time, but that is a macroscopic phenomenon that emerges from averaging the much less orderly movement of the molecules. That orderly sinusoidal pressure oscillation does not imply a similar oscillation of the air molecules; they aren’t swaying back and forth in unison like a line of dancers with locked arms.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: Herman Trivilino, anorlunda and sophiecentaur
  • #33
Nugatory said:
Yes. We plot the pressure at a point and we get a nice sinusoidal function of time, but that is a macroscopic phenomenon that emerges from averaging the much less orderly movement of the molecules.
Electric current is an even stronger analogy. The electrons move in every direction and bounce off the atoms, but the average of all their motions gives the direction and magnitude of current. Even in AC current, the electrons do not wiggle back and forth in unison.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and sophiecentaur
  • #34
Actually, I think the marble analogy is quite a good one. There is this famous model of balls in a container whose bottom vibrates rapidly so that the balls jump around wildly. Would be interesting to see whether you can even simulate a wave when also one of the side walls is made to oscillate albeit more slowly.
 
  • #35
DrDu said:
Actually, I think the marble analogy is quite a good one. There is this famous model of balls in a container whose bottom vibrates rapidly so that the balls jump around wildly. Would be interesting to see whether you can even simulate a wave when also one of the side walls is made to oscillate albeit more slowly.
There are some good school models of kinetic behavior in gases but there are also some really poor ones with motors and rubber diaphragms which clatter a lot but their ‘wave’ patterns are mainly in one’s imagination. I suspect that small ball bearings in a container, excited and kept up by a high power piston / actuator using pink noise, would work well. But it would cost more than a budget level school demo.
 
  • #36
DrDu said:
Actually, I think the marble analogy is quite a good one.
Yes - you can treat gas molecule interactions as perfectly elastic hard-sphere collisions and you arrive at pretty much exactly the correct answer (so long as you appropriately scale the sphere radii in your model).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
7K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K