Bill makes the same correction by numerical examples that I made in generalities before reading his posting. Gene Mechtly. ---- Original message ---- >Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:58:59 -0500 >From: Bill Hooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [USMA:40061] Re: Stuart & Sons Pianos >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > > On 2008 Jan 15 , at 6:43 AM, STANLEY DOORE wrote: > > Each frequency specified in Hertz has a specific > wave length.... > > Sorry, Stanley, it is not quite true that each > frequency has a specified wavelength. It depends > also on the speed of the wave (for waves*). The > relation that is important here is: > f = c/L > Thus, a wavelength of 1 m for sound wave (in air > under normal conditions) would yield a frequency of: > f = (334 m/s)/(1 m) = 334 cycles per second = 334 Hz > since the speed of sound is about 334 m/s. The same > wavelength for electromagnetic waves (light, radio, > etc.) would be: > f = (3 x 10^9 m/s)/(1 m) = 3 x 10^9 Hz = 3 GHz > An ocean wave of 1 m wavelength washing up on the > beach would have a still different frequency. > Clearly, it is not true that a specified wavelength > (of 1 m or any other specified size) does not > correspond to a specific frequency for all waves. > Since the original discussion had involved a > comparison of sound waves with radio waves, this is > relevant here. > Regards, > Bill Hooper > *For simple oscillations and other repetitious > phenomena, there is no "wavelength" at all (because > there is not wave). But the frequency is still a > genuine attribute that can be measured in hertz > (Hz).
