Difference between revisions of "Template:Removing the depth dependence"

From WikiWaves
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
m
Line 18: Line 18:
 
<math>\nabla^2 \Phi + k_0^2 \Phi = 0 </math>
 
<math>\nabla^2 \Phi + k_0^2 \Phi = 0 </math>
 
</center>
 
</center>
in the region not occupied by the scatterers. Not that this is not the standard why to write [[Helmholtz's Equation]]
+
in the region not occupied by the scatterers. Not that this is not the standard way to write [[Helmholtz's Equation]]
 
because <math>k_0</math> is the pure imaginary, and it is more normal to write  
 
because <math>k_0</math> is the pure imaginary, and it is more normal to write  
 
<center>
 
<center>

Revision as of 02:38, 25 August 2008

If we have a problem in which all the scatterers are of constant cross sections so that

[math]\displaystyle{ \partial\Omega = \partial\hat{\Omega} \times z\in[-h,0] }[/math]

where [math]\displaystyle{ \partial\hat{\Omega} }[/math] is a function only of [math]\displaystyle{ x,y }[/math] i.e. the boundary of the scattering bodies is uniform with respect to depth. We can remove the depth dependence separation of variables and obtain that the dependence on depth is given by

[math]\displaystyle{ \phi(x,y,z) = \frac{\cos \big( k_0 (z+h) \big)}{\cos(k_0 h)} \Phi(x,y) }[/math]

Since [math]\displaystyle{ \phi }[/math] satisfies Laplace's Equation, then [math]\displaystyle{ \Phi }[/math] satisfies Helmholtz's Equation

[math]\displaystyle{ \nabla^2 \Phi + k_0^2 \Phi = 0 }[/math]

in the region not occupied by the scatterers. Not that this is not the standard way to write Helmholtz's Equation because [math]\displaystyle{ k_0 }[/math] is the pure imaginary, and it is more normal to write

[math]\displaystyle{ \nabla^2 \Phi - k^2 \Phi = 0 }[/math]

where [math]\displaystyle{ k=-ik_0. }[/math]