What is the Maximum Wavelength for Constructive Interference of Sound Waves?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the maximum wavelength for constructive interference of sound waves from two in-phase loudspeakers. The speakers are separated by 5 meters, and the distance from each speaker to the points of constructive interference is calculated as 1.25 m and 3.75 m. The initial calculation suggests a maximum wavelength of 2.5 m, but confusion arises as the expected answer is 5 m. Participants express skepticism about the textbook's accuracy, suggesting it may contain errors, and debate the interpretation of "constructive interference." Ultimately, the conclusion is that if the interference is not maximally constructive, the wavelength could be unbounded.
Cc518
Messages
23
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Two in-phase loudspeakers, which emit sound in all directions,
are sitting side by side. One of them is moved sideways by 3.0 m,
then forward by 4.0 m. Afterward, constructive interference is
observed 1/4 and 3/4
of the distance between the speakers along the
line that joins them. What is the maximum possible wavelength
of the sound waves?

Homework Equations


Δr=r2 - r1 =mλ

The Attempt at a Solution


The 2 speakers are separated by 5 m, so one speaker is r1= 1/4 x 5m = 1.25m from the point of constructive interference, another speaker is r2=3/4 x 5m = 3.75m from the point of constructive interference.
Δr=r2 - r1 =mλ
= 3.75m-1.25m=2.50m =mλ
So λ=2.5/m
I got λmax=2.5m when m=1
But the answer is 5meters. I don't know why.
Any help is appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Cc518 said:
I don't know why.
Neither do I.
Maybe it's a typo, should be destructive.

On the other hand, not entirely happy with your answer if we take the question literally. It only says the interference is constructive, not that it is maximally constructive. But that still does not yield 5m.
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
Sorry, I just assumed that constructive interference means the interference is maximally constructive because I only know how to solve questions when the interference is maximally constructive or maximally destructive.
I am not surprised that the answer is wrong because the textbook has lots of errors.
Thank you for confirming what I did is correct though :)
 
Cc518 said:
Sorry, I just assumed that constructive interference means the interference is maximally constructive because I only know how to solve questions when the interference is maximally constructive or maximally destructive.
I am not surprised that the answer is wrong because the textbook has lots of errors.
Thank you for confirming what I did is correct though :)
I feel sure they meant maximally con-/de-structive. In fact, if we admit partially constructive the answer to the question is unbounded. For partially destructive, anything just under 10m, I think.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top