Updated specific locations to be searchable, take a look at Las Vegas as an example.

This post has been de-listed

It is no longer included in search results and normal feeds (front page, hot posts, subreddit posts, etc). It remains visible only via the author's post history.

2
In deriving the acoustic wave equation, what is the justification for assuming the gradient of the density is zero in the momentum conservation equation, but not in the mass conservation equation?
Post Flair (click to view more posts with a particular flair)
Post Body

I'm specifically looking at the derivation of the 3D acoustic wave equation from Wikipedia. At the top of the image there are simplified equations for the conservation of momentum (where, in order to get to this form, the gradient of the density must have been assumed to be 0?), and the conservation of mass (where the gradient of the density appears to be finite). I can't quite wrap my head around the reason for this - could anyone offer any help?

Edit: Thanks to /u/rs6866, who pointed out that my original interpretation of the simplified momentum conservation equation was incorrect. The gradient of the density in the momentum equation does not need to be 0 in order to get the form of the equation I linked to above.

Author
Account Strength
90%
Account Age
13 years
Verified Email
Yes
Verified Flair
No
Total Karma
2,320
Link Karma
946
Comment Karma
1,374
Profile updated: 1 day ago
Posts updated: 6 months ago

Subreddit

Post Details

We try to extract some basic information from the post title. This is not always successful or accurate, please use your best judgement and compare these values to the post title and body for confirmation.
Posted
9 years ago