Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Cecil Moore" wrote ... On Oct 14, 12:01 pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: Water molecules move mostly horizontally. See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stokes_drift What percentage of water molecules are moving more horizontally than vertically for what percentage of the time? That percentage is certainly pretty small. Even for those normal steady-state waves, it appears that the vertical motion at the surface is still greater than the horizontal motion for at least half of the cycle. Stokes measured the movements. They are shown the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:De...ee_periods.gif Each wave transports a mass. So the movements must be nonsymmetrical in in direction of propagation. *Anywhere except at the very surface, the vertical motion is obviously greater than the horizontal motion*. But the subject was a transient tsunami wave where the horizontal motion is virtually non-existent because of inertia. If the bottom of the ocean go up than the water is flowing outside this place. It is a simple flow not a wave. S* |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 16, 8:17*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"Cecil Moore" ... On Oct 14, 12:01 pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: Water molecules move mostly horizontally. See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stokes_drift What percentage of water molecules are moving more horizontally than vertically for what percentage of the time? That percentage is certainly pretty small. Even for those normal steady-state waves, it appears that the vertical motion at the surface is still greater than the horizontal motion for at least half of the cycle. Stokes measured the movements. They are shown thehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:De..._three_periods... Each wave transports a mass. So the movements must be nonsymmetrical in in direction of propagation. *Anywhere except at the very surface, the vertical motion is obviously greater than the horizontal motion*. But the subject was a transient tsunami wave where the horizontal motion is virtually non-existent because of inertia. If the bottom of the ocean go up than the water is flowing outside this place. It is a simple flow not a wave. S* water flow and water waves are NOT good analogs for electromagnetic waves. the only common part is that some part of the solution of their equations includes a sine or cosine function. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "K1TTT" wrote ... water flow and water waves are NOT good analogs for electromagnetic waves. the only common part is that some part of the solution of their equations includes a sine or cosine function. Each waves are the same. They transport mass and energy. They never are harmonic. S* |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 17, 9:28*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"K1TTT" ... water flow and water waves are NOT good analogs for electromagnetic waves. *the only common part is that some part of the solution of their equations includes a sine or cosine function. Each waves are the same. They transport mass and energy. They never are harmonic. S* no, waves can transport energy without mass. photons have not rest mass, only energy... look that up in your favorite wikipedia. sound waves require mass, but don't have to transport it, just move it back and forth around a point, thus they move energy without net movement of mass. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "K1TTT" wrote ... On Oct 17, 9:28 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: "K1TTT" ... water flow and water waves are NOT good analogs for electromagnetic waves. the only common part is that some part of the solution of their equations includes a sine or cosine function. Each waves are the same. They transport mass and energy. They never are harmonic. S* no, waves can transport energy without mass. photons have not rest mass, only energy... look that up in your favorite wikipedia. sound waves require mass, but don't have to transport it, just move it back and forth around a point, thus they move energy without net movement of mass. So read the Wiki: "For a pure wave motion in fluid dynamics, the Stokes drift velocity is the average velocity when following a specific fluid parcel as it travels with the fluid flow. For instance, a particle floating at the free surface of water waves, experiences a net Stokes drift velocity in the direction of wave propagation. More generally, the Stokes drift velocity is the difference between the average Lagrangian flow velocity of a fluid parcel, and the average Eulerian flow velocity of the fluid at a fixed position. This nonlinear phenomenon is named after George Gabriel Stokes, who derived expressions for this drift in his 1847 study of water waves." This nonlinear phenomenon is in each real wave. In texbooks are a paper waves - for kids. They are linear and symmetric. "just move it back and forth around a point" is a simplification necessary in schools. S* |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 17, 4:32*pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"K1TTT" ... On Oct 17, 9:28 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: "K1TTT" ... water flow and water waves are NOT good analogs for electromagnetic waves. the only common part is that some part of the solution of their equations includes a sine or cosine function. Each waves are the same. They transport mass and energy. They never are harmonic. S* no, waves can transport energy without mass. *photons have not rest mass, only energy... look that up in your favorite wikipedia. *sound waves require mass, but don't have to transport it, just move it back and forth around a point, thus they move energy without net movement of mass. So read the Wiki: "For a pure wave motion in fluid dynamics, the Stokes drift velocity is the average velocity when following a specific fluid parcel as it travels with the fluid flow. For instance, a particle floating at the free surface of water waves, experiences a net Stokes drift velocity in the direction of wave propagation. More generally, the Stokes drift velocity is the difference between the average Lagrangian flow velocity of a fluid parcel, and the average Eulerian flow velocity of the fluid at a fixed position. This nonlinear phenomenon is named after George Gabriel Stokes, who derived expressions for this drift in his 1847 study of water waves." This nonlinear phenomenon is in each real wave. In texbooks are a paper waves - for kids. They are linear and symmetric. "just move it back and forth around a point" is a simplification necessary in schools. S* ah, but that requires fluid flow. electromagnetic waves do not require fluid flow or they could not travel at c. There may be some analogous phenomena in plasma where you can get non-linear effects but they would not propagate at c, they would be at some much smaller velocity. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Uzytkownik "K1TTT" napisal w wiadomosci ... On Oct 17, 4:32 pm, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: More generally, the Stokes drift velocity is the difference between the average Lagrangian flow velocity of a fluid parcel, and the average Eulerian flow velocity of the fluid at a fixed position. This nonlinear phenomenon is named after George Gabriel Stokes, who derived expressions for this drift in his 1847 study of water waves." This nonlinear phenomenon is in each real wave. In texbooks are a paper waves - for kids. They are linear and symmetric. "just move it back and forth around a point" is a simplification necessary in schools. ah, but that requires fluid flow. electromagnetic waves do not require fluid flow or they could not travel at c. EM waves are the torsional vibrations in a solid dielectric. In solids are the strains. Tiny flows. There may be some analogous phenomena in plasma where you can get non-linear effects but they would not propagate at c, they would be at some much smaller velocity. The vector calculus describe only movements. Ancient people describesd the planet movements. But the planet were described more later. The same is with the radio waves. They are still not described physically. In the description must be words electrons and voltage. S* |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 16, 3:17*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
If the bottom of the ocean go up than the water is flowing outside this place. It is a simple flow not a wave. :-) The bottom of the ocean going up (and down), i.e. earthquake, is the major *cause* of Tsunami waves. Once set in motion, no further movement of the bottom of the ocean is necessary. The energy in a Tsunami wave extends all the way from the depth of the earthquake source to the surface. Almost all of the water molecule movement in a Tsunami wave is up and down. There is virtually no simple flow in a Tsunami wave since the *energy* is traveling at hundreds of meters per second. If it was "simple flow and not a wave" the energy in the wave would be dissipated in accelerating the water molecules to a velocity of hundreds of meters per second. Hint: Try making a spinning top out of an unboiled egg. -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Cecil Moore" wrote ... On Oct 16, 3:17 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: If the bottom of the ocean go up than the water is flowing outside this place. It is a simple flow not a wave. :-) The bottom of the ocean going up (and down), i.e. earthquake, is the major *cause* of Tsunami waves. Once set in motion, no further movement of the bottom of the ocean is necessary. The energy in a Tsunami wave extends all the way from the depth of the earthquake source to the surface. Almost all of the water molecule movement in a Tsunami wave is up and down. There is virtually no simple flow in a Tsunami wave since the *energy* is traveling at hundreds of meters per second. "The measured tsunami flow velocities were within the range of 2 to 5 m/s. " From: http://www.agu.org/journals/ABS/2006/2006GL026784.shtml If it was "simple flow and not a wave" the energy in the wave would be dissipated in accelerating the water molecules to a velocity of hundreds of meters per second. Hint: Try making a spinning top out of an unboiled egg. It is like the soliton. S* -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 17, 9:36*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
"Cecil Moore" ... On Oct 16, 3:17 am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote: If the bottom of the ocean go up than the water is flowing outside this place. It is a simple flow not a wave. :-) The bottom of the ocean going up (and down), i.e. earthquake, is the major *cause* of Tsunami waves. Once set in motion, no further movement of the bottom of the ocean is necessary. The energy in a Tsunami wave extends all the way from the depth of the earthquake source to the surface. Almost all of the water molecule movement in a Tsunami wave is up and down. There is virtually no simple flow in a Tsunami wave since the *energy* is traveling at hundreds of meters per second. "The measured tsunami flow velocities were within the range of 2 to 5 m/s.. " From: *http://www.agu.org/journals/ABS/2006/2006GL026784.shtml If it was "simple flow and not a wave" the energy in the wave would be dissipated in accelerating the water molecules to a velocity of hundreds of meters per second. Hint: Try making a spinning top out of an unboiled egg. It is like the soliton. S* -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com ah, grabbed another non-sequitar term to add to your gibberish now? for how long will everything be a soliton to you? |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Easy way to learn English ***** download materials | Shortwave | |||
Antenna Building Materials | Antenna | |||
Reference Materials Wanted | Shortwave | |||
Reference Materials Wanted | Scanner | |||
RF transmission through various materials | Antenna |