Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T00:34:40.418Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The long-wave paradox in the theory of gravity waves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

F. Ursell
F. Ursell
Affiliation:
Trinity CollegeCambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The theory of long waves in shallow water under gravity employs two different approaches, which have given rise to a well-known paradox remarked by Stokes, but hitherto not fully resolved. On the one hand it was shown by Airy (1) that, if the pressure at any point in the fluid is equal to the hydrostatic head due to the column of water above it, then no wave form can be propagated without change hi shallow water of uniform depth; on the other hand, it was shown by Rayleigh's theory (8) of the solitary wave that this conclusion may be incorrect. In the present paper an attempt is made to elucidate the paradox. Waves of small amplitude η0 and large horizontal wave-length λ (compared with the depth h of the water) are studied, and it is shown that Airy's conclusion is valid if η0λ2/h3 ia large, whereas the solitary wave has η0λ2/h3 of order unity. Equations of motion are derived corresponding to large, moderate and small values of η0λ2/h3; these can be summarized in a single equation for the profile η(x, t):

due to Boussinesq (3).

It is also shown that the linearized theory of surface waves is valid only if η0/λ and η0λ2/h3 are both small. Some remarks are made on the generation of the solitary wave, and on the breaking of waves on a shelving beach.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society , Volume 49 , Issue 4 , October 1953 , pp. 685 - 694
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Philosophical Society 1953

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

(1)Airy, G. B. Article, ‘Tides and waves’. Encyclopaedia metropolitana (London, 1845).Google Scholar
(2)Birkhoff, G.Hydrodynamics (Princeton, 1950), p. 23.Google Scholar
(3)Boussinesq, J.J. Math. pures appl. (2), 17 (1872), 55–108.Google Scholar
(4)Jeffreys, H. and Jeffreys, B. S.Methods of mathematical physics, 1st ed. (Cambridge, 1946).Google Scholar
(5)Keller, J. B.Commun. appl. Math. 1 (1948), 323–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(6)Keulegan, G. H. and Patterson, G. W.Bur. Stand. J. Res., Wash., 24 (1940), 47–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7)Lamb, H.Hydrodynamics, 6th ed. (Cambridge, 1932).Google Scholar
(8)Rayleigh, Lord.Phil. Mag. (5), 1 (1876), 257–79 (Scientific papers, vol. 1, pp. 251–71).Google Scholar
(9)Rayleigh, Lord.Proc. roy. Soc. A, 90 (1914), 324–8 (Scientific papers, vol. 6, pp. 250–4).Google Scholar
(10)Scott Russell, J. Report on waves. Report to the fourteenth meeting (1844) of British Asscn. for Advancement of Science (London, 1845), pp. 311–90.Google Scholar
(11)Stoker, J. J.Commun. appl. Math. l (1948), 1–87.Google Scholar
(12)Stokes, G. G.Trans. Camb. phil. Soc. 8 (1849), 449 (Mathematical and physical papers, vol. 1, p. 210).Google Scholar
(13)Stokes, G. G.Phil. Mag. (5), 31 (1891), 314–16 (Mathematical and physical papers, vol. 5, pp. 160–2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar