Transmittance calculation in COMSOL

  • Thread starter Thread starter MrTentacles
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculation Comsol
MrTentacles
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
I am emulating a transmittance vs frequency plot for a research project I am apart of. However I am having difficulty understanding something. The plot has the transmittance values as a unit of decibels anywhere from 0 to -40, but the equation they’ve given me is attached below. The equation has the absolute value of the pressures so how exactly are they getting negative numbers out of this? Is there something I’m missing?
Any help would be great thank you.
Relevant Equations
.
4CDFDF0F-C245-493A-88A4-8CB784CC31A7.jpeg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you familiar with decibels? If ##T=0.03## in normal form (unitless), then in dB it would be ##10\times \log_{10} \left(T\right)\approx -15.2dB##. Note also that in some cases, especially in engineering it is common to plot power in decibels. I am not sure what your setup is, but if pressure is related to the amplitude of the sound waves, I would guess that the power of the sound-waves is the square of it (with some constants), so the dB expression in this case would be ##20\times\log_{10}\left(T\right)=-30.4 dB##
 
  • Like
Likes MrTentacles
This is very helpful thank you!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top