Standing Wave Equation: Exploring Y = 2Asin(\omegat)cos(kx)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the standing wave equation, specifically the transformation of the sum of two waves into a simplified form. The lecturer presented the equation y = Asin(ωt - kx) + Asin(ωt + kx), which simplifies to y = 2Asin(ωt)cos(kx) using trigonometric identities. The confusion arises regarding the interpretation of antinodes when x = 0, leading to a preference for the alternative equation y = 2Acos(ωt)sin(kx). The participant ultimately resolved their query independently.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of wave mechanics and wave superposition
  • Familiarity with trigonometric identities
  • Knowledge of standing wave characteristics
  • Basic calculus for wave function manipulation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of standing wave equations in detail
  • Explore the implications of antinodes and nodes in wave behavior
  • Learn about the applications of standing waves in physical systems
  • Investigate the differences between sinusoidal and cosine wave representations
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching wave mechanics, and anyone interested in the mathematical modeling of wave phenomena.

j-e_c
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
My lecturer said that a standing wave is formed when two waves that travel in the opposite have the same frequency.

He said that if the waves are y1 and y2, then the resulting wave y can be given as the sum:

y = y1 + y2.

y = Asin(\omegat - kx) + Asin(\omegat + kx). (1)

Where the plus and minus kx denotes their direction.

However, when (with a bit of trigonometric identity work) equation (1) is simplified it gives:

y = 2Asin(\omegat)cos(kx).

But how can this be? I mean, if x = 0, then the equation tells us that there is an antinode, which (for a string) isn't true.

I've seen the equation y = 2Acos(\omegat)sin(kx), which makes more sense when I consider a string for example.

To get to it you need the equation

y = Asin(kx - \omegat) + Asin(kx + \omegat) (2)

My question is, why would you use equation (2) and not equation (1)?

Thank you in advance for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's OK, I've solved it now.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
8K
Replies
13
Views
13K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
11K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
19K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K