Wave Motion: Why Does Particle Lag Behind its Predecessor?

AI Thread Summary
In a progressive wave, particles lag behind their predecessors due to the mathematical representation of wave motion. The equation y = A sin(ωt) describes the position of a particle at the origin, while y = A sin(ω(t - x/v)) shows how particles further along the wave experience a delay. This negative phase value indicates that the phase of the wave at a distant point is earlier, as the wave has not yet reached that location. Understanding this lag is essential for grasping wave behavior and propagation. The discussion highlights the importance of mathematical equations in explaining physical phenomena in wave motion.
sunmoon
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
For an progressive wave why the phase particle lags behind of time than it's predecessor one ? we know for a particle which is at the origin follows the equation # # y=# # A sin \omega t and the following particle follows # # y=# # A sin \omega (t-x/t)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi and welcome.
I asked that very same question when I was at school; it seems 'backward' at first sight. The Maths describes what happens and you can justify that negative sign in the wave equation by realising that the phase of the wave, seen at a more distant point, is earlier (because the later bit of the wave hasn't arrived yet). The negative phase value means a lag in the wave.
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

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?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Solutions to Simple Harmonic Motion second order differential equation
Replies
1
Views
1K
Hamilton-Jacobi equation and particle-wave motion
Replies
1
Views
2K
Deriving the progressive mechanical wave equation
Replies
3
Views
2K
Real life example of the composition of two SHMs with same angular frequency
Replies
21
Views
3K
Phase relation between strain and particle velocity
Replies
1
Views
1K
A Rigid body motion (RBM) transformation
Replies
3
Views
1K
Why Does Friction Provide Centripetal Acceleration in Circular Motion?
Replies
37
Views
4K
Angular Momentum in Spherical Coordinates
Replies
2
Views
5K
I Does two-slit sound-wave interference pattern return to original form?
Replies
10
Views
2K
I Physical Meaning of the Imaginary Part of a Wave Function
Replies
1
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top