Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 11:51:43 -0700
From: jsd@av8n.com
To: phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] waves on a string
On 12/09/2010 09:00 AM, Carl Mungan wrote:
Anyhow, there's a recent Letter paper by Burko in Eur. J. Phys.
31:L71 (2010) claiming the usual textbook formula for energy of a
string wave is wrong. The gist is that instead of the square of dy/dx
in the PE term, one should have y * second deriv. of y w.r.t. x.
http://iopscience.iop.org/0143-0807/31/5/L01/
My first remark is that authors who don't number *all* of
their equations should be awarded a dunce cap or some other
badge of shame. It is spectacularly selfish for an author to
number only the equations /he/ wants to refer to. What if
somebody else wants to refer to some of the other equations?
My second remark is that Prof. Burko should proofread his
equations, and/or that IOP should find some reviewers who
actually look at the equations. Some of the equations in
this paper don't pass basic dimensional-analysis checks.
More importantly: I think the idea of the article is OK as
far as it goes. The author doesn't claim any originality
and cites Morse and Feschbach as a source of the approved
derivation.
I recommend that anybody who is interested in this stuff
(and almost everybody else) should take a look at what
Rayleigh had to say. That was one very smart guy, and
reading his book is always amusing.
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l