>>11595097avoid the path of the /sci/ pseud. don't make wild guesses based off vague intuition. arrive at reasonable conclusions based on mathematical understanding. even the most basic understanding of the math is better than the most complex trivia about the metaphysics of quantum field theory.
Starting simple, the 1D solution to a wave equation looks something like
here, A is the amplitude, f is the frequency, lambda is the wavelength, and theta is some phase offset.
Notably, this is a function of both space (x) and time (t), and is not a standing wave, which you can show to yourself: standing waves have nodes (locations in space where the wave is equal to zero). You can see that no matter what value you pick for x, this equation will always oscillate over time with amplitude A.
Consider if f was zero and the wave was only an equation of space: then it would look like a frozen sinusoidal function in space: not a wave. Now consider if lambda was zero and the wave was only an equation of time: then the value would be equal everywhere in space, and oscillate up and down over time. Neither of these two phenomena are "waves". Instead, lambda and f are related by the relationship where v is the speed of the wave in the medium (speed of light, speed of sound, etc). This comes from the real definition of a wave, which is a linear 2nd order partial differential equation.
As I'm sure you know, a standing wave can be analysed as the linear combination (superposition) of 2 waves, travelling in opposite directions. for our wave equation solution, this corresponds to the superposition of two separate solutions of the wave equation PDE, with positive and negative f. Given all this, show for yourself that if theta=0, that adding two waves with opposing f will result in a function that has a node at x=0.
>>11596615>>11595559>>11595110lol
