Why Isn't My Wavelength Calculation Correct?

  • Thread starter Thread starter StotleD
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Wavelenght
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a wavelength calculation issue where the user is confused about the increments on a wave diagram. Each increment on the equilibrium line is 420 cm, and the user multiplies 7 increments by 4.2 meters but still receives an incorrect answer. Clarification is sought on what constitutes an "increment" and how to accurately measure wavelength, which is defined as the distance from one peak to the next or one trough to the next. The user is unsure if they are missing a step in their calculation process. Accurate understanding of wave measurement is crucial for resolving the calculation error.
StotleD
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
I have a picture of a wave I am looking at. Each increment on the equilibrium line is 420 cm. I am asked to find the wavelength. there are 7 increments between one location of the first wave and the second wave. I multiply 7 times 4.2 meters and the answer is still wrong. Why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What do you mean by "each increment on the equilibrium line"?. I don't really understand your description. Do you have a graph of a wave or something? The wavelength is just the distance from one peak to the next, or one trough to the next. Edit: it doesn't necessarily have to be peak to peak, for example, but it's just easier to see it if you take it as that.
 
Last edited:
Thank you Nylex, but that was the first thing I did. I am still getting a "incorrect answer". Yes, I am looking at a picture of a wave. I though I was dong something wrong so I multiplied the number of increments times the given lenght. Am I wrong or am I missing a step?
 
What do you mean by "increments"? :confused:
 

Thread 'Errors and significant figures'

I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
View full post »
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
View full post »

Similar threads

Correct statement about this motion
Replies
15
Views
1K
What does it mean that when light is reflected the "wavelengths of each contributing hue are subtracted"?
Replies
16
Views
1K
Area Under Frequency versus Time Curve meaning?
Replies
8
Views
2K
Why Isn't the Spring Force Sum of Both Ends?
Replies
5
Views
1K
Wavelengths: Length between 2nd-order fringes
Replies
3
Views
2K
Sound Wave Interference and Finding the Path Differences with Diagrams
Replies
20
Views
5K
Superposition of two one-dimensional harmonic waves
Replies
10
Views
2K
Compare the wavelengths of a photon and an electron
Replies
2
Views
4K
Calculating Velocity & Field Strength of Gas: Help Needed!
Replies
1
Views
1K
Why Is My Calculation of the Electric Field at Point P Incorrect?
Replies
2
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top