B Why Does Wave Interference Alter Intensity Distribution?

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter physics user1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Intensity Waves
AI Thread Summary
Wave interference alters intensity distribution due to the principle of superposition, where the resultant wave's intensity is proportional to the square of the sum of the amplitudes, not the sum of the individual intensities. This phenomenon occurs because energy is redistributed between areas of constructive and destructive interference, leading to points of zero intensity and points of increased intensity. The energy conservation principle is upheld, as energy is not created or destroyed but merely transferred between locations. In interference patterns, such as those observed in two-slit experiments, the intensity can vary significantly based on the phase difference between waves. Understanding this behavior is crucial for grasping the underlying physics of wave interactions.
physics user1
Lets consider two waves, the intensity of each wave is proportional to the square of their amplitude, now why the intensity of the sum of the two waves is not the sum of each intensity but is proportional to the square of the sum of the amplitudes? (i know it on the math side and i can demonstrate that but i don't get the physical meaning of that)
Whats the meaning of that? Why is the intensity of the result wave different from the sum of the intensity of the waves? Does this mean that there's a difference between the intensity of two waves and the intensity of the resultant wave, but why this happens?
There are points where the sum of the amplitude is zero then there is no intensity, and others where the intensity is even greather than the sum of the intensity of each wave, i can't get why, doesn't this violate the energy conservation?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The wave equation is a linear equation, if you have two or more waves, the will superpose and become a single wave of its own. In short, it's because waves can superpose.
Cozma Alex said:
Does this mean that there's a difference between the intensity of two waves and the intensity of the resultant wave, but why this happens?
How do you define the terms "two waves" and "resultant wave"?
Cozma Alex said:
There are points where the sum of the amplitude is zero then there is no intensity, and others where the intensity is even greather than the sum of the intensity of each wave, i can't get why, doesn't this violate the energy conservation?
The energy is conserved, but unfortunately at the moment I don't have enough free time to brainstorm a representative example for this issue. I will leave this part to another member.
 
Cozma Alex said:
There are points where the sum of the amplitude is zero then there is no intensity, and others where the intensity is even greather than the sum of the intensity of each wave, i can't get why, doesn't this violate the energy conservation?

It simply redistributes energy from the locations of the minima to the locations of the maxima. It doesn't create new energy at the maxima or destroy energy at the minima. For simple two-slit interference, if the original beams each would produce uniform intensity I0 on the observing screen, their combination produces instead of a uniform 2I0, the intensity pattern $$I = 4I_0 \cos^2 \left( \frac{\delta}{2} \right)$$ where ##\delta## is the phase difference between the two beams at position x on the screen. For Fraunhofer diffraction and small angles, ##\delta## is proportional to x (x = 0 being the center of the screen): $$\delta = 2 \pi \frac{d}{\lambda} \frac{x}{L}$$ (L = distance from slits to screen, d = spacing between slits)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes physics user1
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top