Infact, i might be able to The nodes are the points on the wave with the least amplitude. This means they have the least displacement and therefore they have the least energy. On the other hand, anti nodes have the most amplitude, and therefore carry the most energy
Spoiler
This shows the nodes and antinodes on the wave, the nodes always have the least amplitude (usually 0) and therefore have no movement, no movement is no kinetic energy etc.
Infact, i might be able to The nodes are the points on the wave with the least amplitude. This means they have the least displacement and therefore they have the least energy. On the other hand, anti nodes have the most amplitude, and therefore carry the most amplitude
Spoiler
This shows the nodes and antinodes on the wave, the nodes always have the least amplitude (usually 0) and therefore have no movement, no movement is no kinetic energy etc.
where does this come from? i understand the least displacement and amplitude but i don't see where energy comes into this.
how???? i understand the particle nature of the em spectrum as demonstrated by the photoelectric effect but how to waves transfer energy?
Well the string is moving right? therefore if it is moving it must have a kinetic energy. The derivation of the exact energy of a wave goes way beyond this level
Well the string is moving right? therefore if it is moving it must have a kinetic energy. The derivation of the exact energy of a wave goes way beyond this level
the string is a materialistic thing whereas a wave is not
the string is a materialistic thing whereas a wave is not
Certain waves involve displacing matter. E.g. a wave in water, the water has energy from this wave like motion. In the circumstance of a wave in water the higher the displacement then the more EK there is.
Certain waves involve displacing matter. E.g. a wave in water, the water has energy from this wave like motion. In the circumstance of a wave in water the higher the displacement then the more EK there is.
I see so the waves transfer energy by displacing other stuff? so would those be classed as mechanical/longitudinal waves?
I see so the waves transfer energy by displacing other stuff? so would those be classed as mechanical/longitudinal waves?
yes thus the wave isn't materialistic, yes it acts through the string
A mechanical wave is where matter is oscillating so yes, a EM wave wouldn't be this. Mechanical waves can be transverse or longitudinal. Example of transverse is a water ripple/wave and a longitudinal one would be a sound wave. A sound wave works by knocking particles into each other and transferring their EK.
A mechanical wave is where matter is oscillating so yes, a EM wave wouldn't be this. Mechanical waves can be transverse or longitudinal. Example of transverse is a water ripple/wave and a longitudinal one would be a sound wave. A sound wave works by knocking particles into each other and transferring their EK.
water waves aren't a great example for this, they are a combination of both which might confuse things further
A mechanical wave is where matter is oscillating so yes, a EM wave wouldn't be this. Mechanical waves can be transverse or longitudinal. Example of transverse is a water ripple/wave and a longitudinal one would be a sound wave. A sound wave works by knocking particles into each other and transferring their EK.
i guess what i'm really asking is how this happens... which is probably way beyond my level. ;(