Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "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* |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "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* |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() 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* |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 10/18/2010 2:37 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
The vector calculus describe only movements. Really? I did not know that. Crap. And argh. I thought it was more useful than that. Who knew? tom K0TAR |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 20:43:42 -0500, tom wrote:
On 10/18/2010 2:37 AM, Szczepan Bialek wrote: The vector calculus describe only movements. Really? I did not know that. Crap. And argh. I thought it was more useful than that. Who knew? Stalin had the science writers purge their texts of those qualities that you miss and that we enjoy here in the west (they were condemned as bourgeois inspired perversions with counter-revolution tendencies). Hence you find decrepit pensioners sneering at elitist propaganda (western science) that dismisses the party-approved water models of RF transmission. In the historical perspective, we have to remember this state inspired instruction was learned in an era of RF transmission jammers located in every neighborhood so that trying to hear the VOA or the BBC made things sound like you were listening through the breakers of the surf. Hence the "experience" of the water model was very pervasive and arguing its falsity comes up against the resistance of the old guard. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
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 |