Original poster: William Beaty <billb@xxxxxxxxxx>
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005, Tesla list wrote:
> Original poster: Jim Lux <jimlux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> >So I go back to my prior question: Do lightning strikes actually
> >produce standing waves or not ?!
>
> no, they do not. What lightning does do is put broadband noise into
> a system which has a finite bandwidth.
But the finite-bandwidth peaks are caused by standing waves!
OK... where Earth's tuned cavity is concerned, can you explain the
difference between a standing wave, versus "broadband noise in a system
which has a finite bandwidth?"
These are simply two ways to describe the same phenomenon: if a tuned
cavity has a Q which is high enough to produce a significantly finite
bandwidth at a fundamental frequency (and at overtone frequencies,)
standing waves must be present. A standing wave is the same as two waves
propagating in opposite directions, and in a driven tuned cavity we have
waves propagating through each other in opposite directions.
Only if the propagating wave is absorbed as it moves, falling deep into
noise so it never makes a complete trip around the earth, only then would
no standing waves be present. But then no cavity resonance effects and no
narrowband peaks would be observed either.
Perhaps the original question was about CONTINUOUS standing waves. A
lightning strike would cause an exponential ring-down, like striking a
bell. While the cavity was ringing, standing waves would exist, but their
amplitude would be exponentially decreasing with time.