Why does wave speed affect wavelength but not frequency?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between wave speed, wavelength, and frequency, particularly in the context of waves transitioning between different media. Participants explore how changes in speed affect wavelength while frequency remains constant, and they examine various analogies to clarify these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about how wave speed can change wavelength without affecting frequency, questioning the established concepts.
  • Another participant explains that when a wave crosses into a different medium, the frequency remains constant because the number of wavefronts produced per unit time does not change, while the wavelength can change due to the new speed in the second medium.
  • A participant challenges the explanation by asserting that if the wavelength shortens, the frequency must increase, citing examples of frequency and wavelength relationships.
  • Another response clarifies that the relationship between frequency and wavelength holds true only when speed is constant, suggesting that the initial conditions of the wave must be considered.
  • A participant uses an analogy involving cars passing under a bridge to illustrate that frequency can remain constant even if the speed of the cars changes after passing the bridge, prompting further discussion on how wavefronts behave in different media.
  • One participant introduces a scenario where waves retain their shape versus stretching out, indicating that the behavior of the wave affects the relationship between frequency and wavelength.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; there are multiple competing views regarding the relationship between wave speed, wavelength, and frequency, with some participants asserting that frequency must change with wavelength while others maintain that frequency remains constant across media transitions.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific conditions under which the relationships hold, such as the nature of the wave and the medium it travels through, indicating that assumptions about wave behavior may vary.

PlanetEarth
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi! I was having some difficulty understanding this concept.

If you know how many times per second a wave passes by a point (aka frequency) doesn't that basically say how fast it is? I understand how 2 waves, one with a short wavelength and one with a long wavelength can have the same speed but different frequencies ... but my question is why do they say that the speed will change the wavelength but not the frequency? Because, how can it change the wavelength of an already established wave... by increasing speed, doesn't the frequency automatically increase?


Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Thank you to anyone who replies!
 
PlanetEarth said:
If you know how many times per second a wave passes by a point (aka frequency) doesn't that basically say how fast it is? I understand how 2 waves, one with a short wavelength and one with a long wavelength can have the same speed but different frequencies ... but my question is why do they say that the speed will change the wavelength but not the frequency? Because, how can it change the wavelength of an already established wave... by increasing speed, doesn't the frequency automatically increase?

Think of a wave passing from one medium into another, and the speed of the wave changes across the boundary.

Incident wavefronts hit the boundary at a fixed number per units time - so the number of wavefronts 'produced' in the second medium per unit time is also the same (because you need one incident wavefront to produce one in the second medium) i.e. frequency of the wavefronts will not change across the boundary.

So how can wavelength change?

Think of two wavefronts passing through a boundary. Say the speed of incident wavefront is 1m per second, in the second medium it is 0.5m per second. Now say the frequency is one per second (so incident wave has wavelength of 1m).

When the first wavefront hits the boundary, it starts traveling at speed = 0.5m per second. After 1 second, the second wavefront hits the boundary. During the 1 second it took for the second wavefront to hit the boundary, the first wavefront traveled 0.5m. So the distance between the wavefronts in the second medium is now 0.5m - the wavelength has changed.

Check out the first animation here to help you visualise this: http://www.launc.tased.edu.au/online/sciences/physics/refrac.html
 
I can't believe in all the years playing with this stuff, I still cannot reconcile the statement as said on that link you gave ...

Remember - we cannot lose waves, so the frequency at which they pass cannot change, so their period does not change either - f = 1 / T.

In that time, all parts of the wave move one wavelength, the longer wavelength outside the medium, the shorter wavelength inside the medium.

I see the second statement as a contradiction of the first ... why doesn't it ??

if the wavelength shortens, then the freq increases
eg 100 MHz = 3 metres wavelength 1000MHz (1GHz) = 0.3 metre
( shorter wavelength higher freq)

Dave
 
davenn said:
if the wavelength shortens, then the freq increases
eg 100 MHz = 3 metres wavelength 1000MHz (1GHz) = 0.3 metre
( shorter wavelength higher freq)

This is only valid if the speed is constant. The speed in the first statement is not constant.
 
hi willem

so if you slow the velocity (speed) of the wave, the freq will increase proportionally to the drop in velocity ?

Dave
 
If 100 cars an hour drive under a bridge the frequency is 100 cars an hour regardless of how fast they are driving.

If they speed up after passing the bridge the gap between cars increases but the frequency is still 100 per hour at the next bridge.

The question appears to be how do the wave fronts speed up so the gap between them increases. That depends on what sort of wave and the medium its moving through.
 
CWatters said:
If 100 cars an hour drive under a bridge the frequency is 100 cars an hour regardless of how fast they are driving.

If they speed up after passing the bridge the gap between cars increases but the frequency is still 100 per hour at the next bridge.

The question appears to be how do the wave fronts speed up so the gap between them increases. That depends on what sort of wave and the medium its moving through.

And the alternative situation is where the cars are all joined together (like wagons on a train). As the train speeds up the "wavelength" (distance between the wagons) remains the same but the frequency (how many wagons pass under the bridge) increases.

In short, it depends whether the wave retains its shape or stretches out as it speeds up.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
20K