Where does extra energy come from in superposed waves?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chris 197
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Waves
AI Thread Summary
In the discussion about superposed waves, the focus is on understanding the source of "extra" energy when two identical waves combine in phase, resulting in a higher amplitude and energy. The energy of a wave is calculated using the formula E = A^2, leading to a scenario where two 2m waves combine to create a 4m wave, resulting in a significant increase in energy from 400 J to 1600 J. The confusion arises from the misconception that energy should simply add linearly, while it actually depends on the square of the amplitude. This highlights a misunderstanding of energy conservation in wave interactions, as the energy does not simply appear from nowhere. The discussion emphasizes the importance of correctly applying the principles of wave superposition and energy calculations.
Chris 197
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Where does "extra" energy come from in superposed waves?

1. I am needing to understand how, when two identical waves are superposed in phase, and the amplitude doubles, how is it that the energy of the resulting wave is greater than the sum of the two superposed waves.



2. Given that E = A^2, and my example waves are measured in meters and use this formula: E=100 J/m^2, then,

a wave with an amplitude of 2m therefore has an energy of E = 100 J/m^2 * 2^2 = 400 J

Two 2m waves are superposed in phase and the amplitude is now 4m. The new wave now has an energy of E = 100 J/m^2 * 4^2 = 1600 J

Where did the extra 800J come from? It seems to have come out of thin air, which violates the conservation of energy.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


You cannot write E1 + E2 = A1^2 + A2^2
It should be E1 + E2 = (A1 + A2)^2
 


Thank you rl.bhat.

It seems to me that I did add the amplitudes in the way you described:

"The new wave now has an energy of E = 100 J/m^2 * 4^2 = 1600 J." To get the "4^2" I added two 2m amplitudes of the original waves that were then superposed, and then squared 4 to get 16.

Thanks for the help to understand where I am missing something.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top