B Why don't we use arc length formula to calculate wavelength?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the confusion surrounding the use of the arc length formula to calculate wavelength in sine waves. While the wavelength can be measured between points of the same phase, using arc length does not provide meaningful physical information. The traditional definition of wavelength is important for understanding wave behavior, particularly in contexts like music and electromagnetic waves. Misinterpretations often arise from the mathematical representation of waves, leading to incorrect assumptions about their properties. Ultimately, recognizing the distinction between mathematical functions and their physical representations clarifies the concept of wavelength.
LLT71
Messages
73
Reaction score
5
can you please explain me why don't we use arc length formula to calculate wavelength? seems a bit confusing...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Could you please be more specific?
 
Wavelength of a sine wave, λ, can be measured between any two points with the same phase, such as between crests, or troughs, or corresponding zero crossings as shown.
Why don't we treat that as length of sine function between that two points instead, cause that would give us full length of that function in that interval? This way it seems to me like "length of a line" between two points (crests etc.)=wavelength.
 
Well for one, that measurement wouldn't be useful. Wavelength as it is currently defined has a lot of physical meaning. Some sort of length along the curve does not.
 
  • Like
Likes LLT71
LLT71 said:
Why don't we treat that as length of sine function between that two points instead, cause that would give us full length of that function in that interval?
If you have a sin function usually the vertical axis is something like E field strength or pressure, not distance. So it usually wouldn't make sense unit-wise to use the arc length formula.
 
  • Like
Likes blue_leaf77 and LLT71
LLT71 said:
Wavelength of a sine wave, λ, can be measured between any two points with the same phase, such as between crests, or troughs, or corresponding zero crossings as shown.
Why don't we treat that as length of sine function between that two points instead, cause that would give us full length of that function in that interval? This way it seems to me like "length of a line" between two points (crests etc.)=wavelength.

It's an interesting idea. That would actually be a combination of the wavelength and the amplitude. If you think about music, and notes on a stringed instrument, you can see why the traditional definitions of wavelength and amplitude are important.
 
  • Like
Likes LLT71
thank you all! I think seeing a wave just in a way of math function and not understanding what that function actually represents led me to misinterpret wavelength.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
LLT71 said:
thank you all! I think seeing a wave just in a way of math function and not understanding what that function actually represents led me to misinterpret wavelength.
You are welcome! It is a pretty common misunderstanding for electromagnetic waves just because of the way books draw EM waves.
 
  • Like
Likes LLT71
Dale said:
You are welcome! It is a pretty common misunderstanding for electromagnetic waves just because of the way books draw EM waves.
you are totally right! for ex. one can easily conclude from the way pictures represent them (particulary, basic wave function) that T[period]=lambda[wavelength], which at first seems very obvious and unit-wise not.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top