wanted - rigorous definition of "wave"
Von: John Nagelson (johnnagelson@yahoo.co.uk) [Profil]
Datum: 22.10.2009 11:42
Message-ID: <31ecc77a-900f-404d-9dfb-6429ed7a4a22@e18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>
Newsgroup: alt.sci.physics
Datum: 22.10.2009 11:42
Message-ID: <31ecc77a-900f-404d-9dfb-6429ed7a4a22@e18g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>
Newsgroup: alt.sci.physics
What's a strong and rigorous definition of "wave"? I'd like a definition that covers both waves through media and waves that do not require media, without being 'biased' one way or the other, and which thus enables light to be defined as a wave without the need for an analogy with mechanical waves. John[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]
Antworten
- dlzc (22.10.2009 16:51)
- John Nagelson (22.10.2009 17:54)
- dlzc (22.10.2009 20:01)
- John Nagelson (22.10.2009 21:14)
- dlzc (22.10.2009 21:41)
- John Nagelson (23.10.2009 14:54)
- johnlawrencereedjr (22.10.2009 19:25)
- John Nagelson (22.10.2009 21:09)
- johnlawrencereedjr (22.10.2009 21:55)
- John Nagelson (23.10.2009 14:35)
- johnlawrencereedjr (23.10.2009 21:17)
- PD (24.10.2009 15:55)
- johnlawrencereedjr (25.10.2009 02:49)
- PD (25.10.2009 09:07)
- johnlawrencereedjr (25.10.2009 10:17)
- OG (23.10.2009 00:37)
- Poster (24.10.2009 04:37)
