Understanding air particle velocity as cross product freq x disp

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the relationship between air particle velocity and particle displacement in the context of microphone technology. The equation presented, u(t) = jω × x(t), raises confusion regarding the use of the cross product, as participants note that the terms appear to be scalars. Clarification is sought on whether the equation should be interpreted as a dot product instead. The conversation reveals that the equation resembles the standard form for velocity in simple harmonic motion, leading to the conclusion that the maximum particle displacement can be considered the amplitude. Overall, the notation used in the book is critiqued for causing misunderstanding.
The_Lobster
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
I'm reading a book on microphones and came across the following:

The relation between air particle velocity (u) and particle displacement (x) is given by:
u(t) = j\omega \times x(t)

where \omega = 2\pi f and x(t) is the maximum particle displacement value.

and then it goes off talking about something else...

I feel stupid for asking this, but I don't get how the above equation works? For one, I thought cross products could only be be involving vectors? Aren't all the terms above scalars? Should I treat it as a dot product?

Any help in understanding the above, so I can see how the terms affect each other is greatly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think it is a cross product. It looks like the standard equation for velocity of a particle moving in simple harmonic motion.

I don't know why the book used ##\times## as a multiplication sign here.
 
Thanks, AlephZero! Typical of me getting thrown off by poor notation...
 
AlephZero: Are you saying that that equation is pretty much: v = - A\omega \sin \omega t? Does that mean I can consider the "maximum particle displacement" in the first equation, as the amplitude, A?
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top