This blog is an additional online feature for the course. Highlights of the lectures will be periodically uploaded.
Anonymous commenting facilities on the posts are enabled, following if you have a gmail account is also possible. All comments will be moderated before being published on the blog. You can ask questions on your identity or anonymously, comment on others questions, discuss through comments, answer others questions in comments. This is an extra online facility for understanding the course and help with preparation and assimilation of the course material. Please do not misuse by sending irrelevant or other comments, they will be deleted at the moderation stage. Suggestions and comments are also welcome and will be considered if they are constructive and sensible and implementable under the existing structure.
Best
Gautam Sengupta
Hi, it is a good idea to move the blog to wordpress.com as Wordpress supports native LaTeX math.
ReplyDeleteThats a good idea but it would be too much trouble
ReplyDeleteat this stage. The blog is mostly for Physics issues and the little Maths can be handled by MathHtml.
1)
ReplyDeleteI think we assumed interference from part of cavity(the part which reaches the hole) is same as studying total cavity interference pattern while understanding the proportionality.Which implies it is indept. of geometry but we haven't proved that right?how do we guarantee uniform distribution ? so how actually is the proportionality coming?
2)
why the pattern be standing wave? it may be beats or simple interference?
First of all please comment on the relevant post.
ReplyDeleteThis refers to the second post so choose that from the right archive menu and then comment on that post. It helps in documenting the comments for a post effectively.
The hole is infintesimally small. We have assumed interference between the waves reflected from the walls.
Geometry independent and uniform distribution are two different things. What we will do as is standard in Physics is to assume a simple geometry and show that no element of the geometry really appears in the final expression.
The constant of proportionality is still unknown.
We will do a problem on that.
This a standard vibrational pattern restricted in an interval. Both end points fixed in a vibrating string.
The pattern is a standing wave because the wave is reflected from the wall and interferes with the incident wave. Under some simplifying assumptions we can consider the 3 directions x, y, z independently. Again this is standard wave motion in 3 dimensions.
Wave motion is usually done in a course on Optics.
If you have not done such a course. It might be a good idea to look up "Berkely Physics Volume II"
Wave Motion. Its available in the library and maybe also e-copy in DC ++.
Trying to correlate with the previous Optics course...
ReplyDeleteEven if the walls are conducting shouldn't E(parallel) be 0 only at steady state... In this case what I am expecting is evanescence inside the metal... I could not understand why we discard possibilities like in this pic:
http://tinypic.com/r/2s12i43/7
have we assumed that the length is large compared to the skin depth lengthscale??
You are on the wrong post again.
ReplyDeleteWe are considering only equilibrium conditions.
So no dissipations and the wave is perfectly reflected to form the standing wave scenario.
I discussed this in the class.