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

AI Thread Summary
A standing wave is formed when two waves of the same frequency travel in opposite directions, represented by the equation y = y1 + y2. The resulting wave can be simplified using trigonometric identities to yield y = 2Asin(\omegat)cos(kx). However, this leads to confusion regarding the presence of antinodes at x = 0, which seems incorrect for a string. An alternative equation, y = 2Acos(\omegat)sin(kx), appears more intuitive for strings. The discussion ultimately clarifies the preference for one equation over the other, with the original question resolved by the user.
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.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top