Which wave reaches point B first?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ~christina~
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Point Wave
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating which seismic wave, a P wave or a Rayleigh wave, reaches point B first after an earthquake at point A. The P wave travels through the Earth at a speed of 7.80 m/s, while the Rayleigh wave travels along the surface at 4.50 km/s. The distance between the two points, calculated using a specific formula, is approximately 6,670.64 km. Participants emphasize using the formula for speed (v = d/t) to determine the time taken for each wave to reach point B. The conversation highlights the importance of accurately calculating distance and time to solve the problem correctly.
~christina~
Gold Member
Messages
714
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Two points A and B on the surface of the Earth are at the same longitude and 60 deg apart in latitude. Suppose an earthquake at point A creates a P wave that reaches B by traveling straight throught he body of the Earth at constant speed of 7.80m/s. The earthquake also creates a Rayleigh wave that travels along the surface of the Earth at 4.50km/s.

a) which of these 2 waves arives at B first?
b) What is the time difference in the arrival of these 2 waves at B? Take the Earth's radius to be 6,370km.




Homework Equations


well I found this online for the distance
D= R arc cos[sin(lat 1) x sin(lat 2) + cos (lat 1) x cos (lat 2) x cos [ lon 2- lon 1]]

y(x,t)= f(x- vt)

The Attempt at a Solution



well I first calculated the distance between the 2 points with the equation I found online.

D= R arc cos[sin(lat 1) x sin(lat 2) + cos (lat 1) x cos (lat 2) x cos [ lon 2- lon 1]]

R of earth= 6,370km
lat 1 = 0
lat 2= 60 deg => \pi / 3
lon 1= 0
lon 2= 0

D= 6,370km arc cos[sin(0) x sin(\pi / 3) + cos (0) x cos (\pi / 3) x cos [ 0]]

D= 6,370km arc cos [0 + 0.5]

D= 6,670.64km

x= 6,670.64km

But as to how to find the time has me confused a bit.

I think I use this equation where I just solve for time then subtract the 2 times for the different waves but I'm not 100% certain. (that's where I need help)

y(x,t)= f(x- vt)

for the 1st wave

y(6,670,640m,t)= f(6,670,640m - 7,800m/s (t))


same for the Raleigh wave

y(6,670,640m,t)= f(6,670,640m - 4,500km/s (t))

Or do I just use V= d/t and solve for t??

can someone help me out with which equation to use to find the time it takes for a wave to reach a certain distance?


Thanks
Well I'm not sure how to solve for t since isn't y the transverse position of the wave which I just don't have in the information?

Thanks a lot :smile:
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
~christina~ said:
Or do I just use V= d/t and solve for t??

can someone help me out with which equation to use to find the time it takes for a wave to reach a certain distance?


Thanks
Well I'm not sure how to solve for t since isn't y the transverse position of the wave which I just don't have in the information?

Thanks a lot :smile:


The same eqn as always, which you have written down.

A and B are two points on a circle of radius R. There are two paths to be considered here; one is a straight line from A to B, and the other is the arc from A to B. If you know the angle subtended at the centre, then the dist along the paths are known, and the time is got from dist/speed.

There is absolutely no reason for considering the wave eqn here.
 
Shooting Star said:
The same eqn as always, which you have written down.

A and B are two points on a circle of radius R. There are two paths to be considered here; one is a straight line from A to B, and the other is the arc from A to B. If you know the angle subtended at the centre, then the dist along the paths are known, and the time is got from dist/speed.

There is absolutely no reason for considering the wave eqn here.

It's interesting since I got the answer incorrect from what the book has. I think the distance is what is causing this.
You didn't say whether the way I got the distance is correct or not... Below

The Attempt at a Solution



well I first calculated the distance between the 2 points with the equation I found online.

D= R arc cos[sin(lat 1) x sin(lat 2) + cos (lat 1) x cos (lat 2) x cos [ lon 2- lon 1]]

R of earth= 6,370km
lat 1 = 0
lat 2= 60 deg => \pi / 3
lon 1= 0
lon 2= 0

D= 6,370km arc cos[sin(0) x sin(\pi / 3) + cos (0) x cos (\pi / 3) x cos [ 0]]

D= 6,370km arc cos [0 + 0.5]

D= 6,670.64km

If the above way I got the distance from A=> B is incorrect then I'm not sure how I'd find it. I don't understand what you said about finding the distance.

Thanks
 
Since the two points are on the same longitude, simply think of the circle you'll get get if you slice it through that longitude. You now have to deal with just a 2-d circle, whose radius is that of the earth. The difference of the latitudes being 60 deg means that the radii from the two points subtend an angle of 60 deg at the centre.

Suppose the centre of the Earth is O. Angle AOB is given. Draw a simple diagram. Can you find segment AB? Can you find arc AB? Big calculations are not necessary, I think. :smile:

After you find the distances, use v=d/t.
 
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...
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Back
Top