Wave motion and a stretched string

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the wave motion of a stretched string as presented in Griffiths' electrodynamics, specifically addressing the conditions under which certain mathematical approximations are valid. Participants explore the assumptions related to small angles and the derivation of partial derivatives in the context of wave motion.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the justification for replacing the sine function with the tangent function, seeking clarity on the conditions that ensure the angles are small.
  • Another participant asserts that the small displacement of the string from its equilibrium position leads to small angles, emphasizing that if this assumption fails, the analysis is compromised.
  • A participant reiterates that the small angle assumption is indeed an assumption, indicating a lack of further justification.
  • There is a discussion about the Taylor series expansion of the partial derivative and its implications for deriving a second partial derivative, with one participant seeking clarification on the meaning of the term O(Δz²) in the context of the expansion.
  • Another participant reflects on their understanding of the derivation process, suggesting that the difference in partial derivatives resembles a derivative formula, but notes a missing division by delta time.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing levels of understanding regarding the assumptions of small angles and the derivation of partial derivatives. There is no consensus on the necessity or implications of these assumptions, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the clarity of the mathematical derivations.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on the assumption of small displacements and angles, which may not be universally applicable. The mathematical steps involved in the Taylor series expansion and the transition to second derivatives are also noted as potentially unclear.

mondo
Messages
27
Reaction score
3
I continue my reading of Griffiths electrodynamics (chapter 9, electromagnetic waves) and I got stuck on this:
237fe636e4cbb4c33a445f778634b7a4.png

Author tries to prove a stretched string supports wave motion and I found it very difficult to grasp.
In the second equation, why can we replace sin function with a tangents really? What guarantees that the angles are small? Is he trying to match it to partial derivative formula?
Next, how a difference of partial derivatives $\frac{\partial_{f}}{\partial_{z}}$ became a second partial derivative in the second equation?

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is the string's displacement from its stable equilibrium position (assumed horizontal) that is small (compared with the length of the string); a consequence of this is that the angle between the horizontal and the tangent to the string is everywhere small. If this assumption is not valid, then neither are the results of the analysis.

For your second question, you have from the Taylor series expansion of \frac{\partial f}{\partial z} wrt z that <br /> \left.\frac{\partial f}{\partial z}\right|_{z+ \Delta z} = \left.\frac{\partial f}{\partial z}\right|_{z} + \left.\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial z^2}\right|_{z}\Delta z + O(\Delta z^2).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mondo
mondo said:
What guarantees that the angles are small?
It's an assumption.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mondo
pasmith said:
It is the string's displacement from its stable equilibrium position (assumed horizontal) that is small (compared with the length of the string); a consequence of this is that the angle between the horizontal and the tangent to the string is everywhere small. If this assumption is not valid, then neither are the results of the analysis.

For your second question, you have from the Taylor series expansion of \frac{\partial f}{\partial z} wrt z that <br /> \left.\frac{\partial f}{\partial z}\right|_{z+ \Delta z} = \left.\frac{\partial f}{\partial z}\right|_{z} + \left.\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial z^2}\right|_{z}\Delta z + O(\Delta z^2).
Thanks for a repones.
As for the first part about the small angles - yes I think I got it. Thanks for mentioning the assumed position is horizontal - that helped me to visualize the movement.

As for the second derivative derivation, what is the last term in your formula -O(\Delta z^2). ?
I think in the book formula T (\frac{\partial_{f}}{\partial_{z}}|_{z+\delta z} - \frac{\partial_{f}}{\partial_{z}}|_{z}) is something (in the parenthesis) that at a glance looks very close to the derivative formula - we take value at time z+\delta z and subtract from a value at time z. The only missing thing (for it to be a derivative) is a division by this delta time. So, now, if we multiply it by this missing delta, and rewrite it as a derivative (which in this case is a second derivative) we get what's in the book. Am I right?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
696
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
654
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K