What is a wave with no frequency?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter pinestone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Frequency Wave
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
52 replies · 10K views
pinestone
Messages
140
Reaction score
3
I'm not quite sure if this thread belongs here, but what would you call one wave that has no frequency. Zero Hz? A mobius ?:confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It would not be much of a wave without a frequency. I suppose maybe the cloest thing that at least i can think of is a standing wave. It has a frequency but the frequency and motion of the wave are such that the wave does appear to move.
 
Even standing waves have well defined frequency components. All waves possesses a frequency spectrum, the 0 Hz point is included in such a spectrum (even negative frequencies).

There really is no ambiguity here. All waves have a spectrum.

Claude.
 
Pengwuino said:
... standing wave. It has a frequency but the frequency and motion of the wave are such that the wave does appear to move.
Yes, I see- a wave that does not have an iteration (due to reflection) appears to be motionless within a frame of time.
 
Tide said:
How about calling it a "static field?"
Is there a specific static field that can be described as having a moebius form?
 
Last edited:
pinestone said:
Is there a specific static field that can be described as having a moebius form?

I don't see what it even would *mean* for a field to have a moebius form, after all, it is a manifold and not a field, no ?
 
pinestone said:
I'm not quite sure if this thread belongs here, but what would you call one wave that has no frequency. Zero Hz? A mobius ?:confused:
Before we can answer the question, we need to see the equation for this "wave" amplitude vs. time. Can you post what you mean?
 
berkeman said:
Before we can answer the question, we need to see the equation for this "wave" amplitude vs. time. Can you post what you mean?
I'm not using an equation. It is a visible image.
 
pinestone said:
I'm not using an equation. It is a visible image.
Well, can you write an equation for it so we can "see" it too? Or else attach a JPG picture of it?
 
berkeman said:
Well, can you write an equation for it so we can "see" it too? Or else attach a JPG picture of it?
I can't tell you much without making my patent lawyer upset. I will have plenty of images and a great description of my invention on my website within a couple of weeks.
 

Attachments

  • wave.jpg
    wave.jpg
    5.1 KB · Views: 596
chroot said:
You're not going to get meaningful answers with a meaningless question and a meaningless picture, pinestone. :rolleyes:

- Warren
I guess we will all have to wait...
 
If your patent lawyer knew what he was doing, he could file a provisional patent application for you in a matter of hours. This would establish a first filing date and immeditely begin providing legal protection. Then you could share your project's details without fear of legal problems.

Otherwise, I'm afraid your questions and picture are entirely non-sensical.

- Warren
 
chroot said:
If your patent lawyer knew what he was doing, he could file a provisional patent application for you in a matter of hours. This would establish a first filing date and immeditely begin providing legal protection. Then you could share your project's details without fear of legal problems.

Otherwise, I'm afraid your questions and picture are entirely non-sensical.

- Warren
Some things you just can't rush into:cool:
 
chroot said:
I take it you don't know how to the patent process works, then. Patents are all about rushing.

- Warren
I do know how the process works, that is why we are doing it right the first time. My last patent cost me a small fortune because the patent office wasn't satisfied the first couple of times around. It must be nice using someone elses lab and resources. Kinda like living at home with mom:biggrin:
 
Last edited:
chroot said:
And why wasn't the patent office satisfied with your previous applications?

- Warren
Because I tried to rush it through and there were some questionable items. ($2000.00 extra, each time).
 
Since we aren't really getting anything resolved here, maybe it's time to quit this...:frown:
 
We have people like you on here pretty frequently, pinestone... the sort who don't seem to know even basic physics or mathematics, yet have some incredible new secret invention in the works, patent pending, with which they need help. My advice: pick up a copy of Halliday and Resnick.

- Warren
 
Last edited:
chroot said:
We have people like you on here pretty frequently, pinestone... the sort who don't seem to know even basic physics or mathematics, yet have some incredible new secret invention in the works, patent pending, with which they need help. My advice: pick up a copy of Resnick and Halliday.

- Warren
It won't be a secret much longer. Thanks for the advice.
 
chroot said:
I wait with bated breath.

- Warren
No, really- thanks for the advice. I found the entire book on-line. It's quite comprehensive and will be quite helpful to me.:wink:
 
Zero Hz directly implies "no frequency" of polarity change. This is called DC, or "direct current"
 
pallidin said:
Zero Hz directly implies "no frequency" of polarity change. This is called DC, or "direct current"
A stationary wave would be traveling at the speed of light.
 
Here's a question for you, Pinestone. Does your invention actually work?
 
pinestone said:
A stationary wave would be traveling at the speed of light.
Wait...what?

No...
 
Manchot said:
Here's a question for you, Pinestone. Does your invention actually work?
Yes. Very well, indeed.:smile: