Why does eg a falling stone crate many ripples on a water surface?

AI Thread Summary
When an object like a stone hits water, it creates multiple ripples due to the energy transfer over time, causing oscillations rather than a single wave. The initial disturbance generates a well, and as displaced water returns, it overshoots, forming peaks and valleys. This process continues as the energy dissipates, leading to multiple ripples instead of just one. The restoring forces acting on the water depend on the displacement, preventing it from returning to its original state instantaneously. Additionally, disturbances propagate from all points, creating a complex wave pattern rather than a single circular ripple.
Antti
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
So I've studied physics at the university quite a bit and was a bit surprised when I couldn't answer this simple question a friend asked me. When something lands in water why are several ripples created? Like why is the resulting water wave made up of several peaks and valleys and not just one peak, valley or peak/valley pair?

The only possible explanation I could come up with at the time was that an object does not cross the water surface instantaneously. It transfers energy to the water over some period of time and thus the water wave would have some spatial extension because of that. However I suspect that it's not the whole story.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Make a sudden movement at the end of a long rope, and you will see a wave propagate even though no part of the rope follows the wave. The rope won't oscillate because it loses its energy hitting the ground, but water will keep moving until friction stops it.

So the waves aren't water moving outwards, they are water oscillating back and forth, giving the illusion of something moving in one direction.
 
When the stone hits the water it creates a well. Displaced water flows back into the well, but the energy it has gained from the stone means it 'overshoots' and creates a peak, which then collapses, forming a well.. Each of these motions generates a ripple and saps some of the energy from the centre.
 
haruspex said:
When the stone hits the water it creates a well. Displaced water flows back into the well, but the energy it has gained from the stone means it 'overshoots' and creates a peak, which then collapses, forming a well.. Each of these motions generates a ripple and saps some of the energy from the centre.

Thanks, that sort of makes sense. But he might say "well why doesn't the center return to its original state just once and only create one ripple?". Somehow I suspect energy conservation has something to do with it.
 
Antti said:
But he might say "well why doesn't the center return to its original state just once and only create one ripple?
Because of inertia and the fact that the restoring forces (which try to bring it into the original state) depend on the displacement from the original state. When the water is moving back upwards it has some velocity, and cannot suddenly stop in the original state, especially since the restoring forces at the original state are zero.

Also note that the disturbance propagates in all directions, from every position that is disturbed. Not just from the the original position, where the disturbance was caused externally by the stone. So you cannot have a single circular ripple propagating just outwards, with calm water inside. Because every point on that ripple is a source of a circular wave front. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huygens–Fresnel_principle
 
Last edited:
Antti said:
"well why doesn't the center return to its original state just once and only create one ripple?". Somehow I suspect energy conservation has something to do with it.

tell him, "same as why a cork bobs up and down when you push it down" :wink:

(and yes, it's energy conservation … the restoring force is always in the same direction (on the way up), so that's lots of energy when it reaches the start position!)
 
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...
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?
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...
Back
Top