Understanding the Phase Constant in y(x,t) Equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sciencer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constant Phase
AI Thread Summary
The phase constant PHI in the wave equation y(x,t) = ym * sin(kx - wt - PHI) is crucial for accurately representing wave behavior when the wave does not start at zero at the origin (x=0, t=0). It allows for the shifting of the wave profile in space or time, which can be visualized by comparing wave snapshots at different phase values. When PHI is zero, the wave starts at its maximum or minimum, but introducing PHI shifts this starting point, demonstrating how the wave can move forward or backward. Understanding this shift clarifies the role of PHI in ensuring the equation accommodates various initial conditions. Thus, PHI is essential for capturing the general case of wave behavior.
Sciencer
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Hi,

In the equation
y(x,t) = ym * sin(kx - wt - PHI)

I thought I understand why we have that phase constant atleast mathmetically but after thinking about it I don't think I understand it completely like here in my book it says the phase constant moves the wave forward or backward in space or time. Now let's say
we have wave at t = 0 and x = 0;

we would have y(x,t) = ym * sin(-PHI) that wouldn't really move it forward or backward in space or time if we had y(x,t) = ym + PHI then yeh it would have but I don't see how it would moves it backward or forward in that case ?

I can see how they derived
y(x,t) = ym * sin(kx - wt) but that PHI keeps confusing me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You might try sketching a 'snapshot' of the wave (that is a graph of y against x) at t = 0, first for the case \phi = 0, then for the case \phi = \pi/2. The shift (in the x direction) of the wave profile brought about by \phi should then be clear.

The purpose of including \phi is so we have an equation which fits the general case: when y doesn't happen to be zero when x = 0 and t = 0. [An alternative, sometimes permissible, sometimes not, is to choose our zero of time (or of x) expressly to ensure that y = 0 and \frac{\partial y}{\partial x} > 0 when t = 0 and x = 0. Then we don't have to bother with \phi.]
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top