<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="bbPress/1.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>k-Wave User Forum &#187; Topic: Understanding the derivation of the nonlinear terms</title>
		<link>http://www.k-wave.org/forum/topic/understanding-the-derivation-of-the-nonlinear-terms</link>
		<description>Support for the k-Wave MATLAB toolbox</description>
		<language>en-US</language>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2026 22:34:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<generator>http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2</generator>
		<textInput>
			<title><![CDATA[Search]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[Search all topics from these forums.]]></description>
			<name>q</name>
			<link>http://www.k-wave.org/forum/search.php</link>
		</textInput>
		<atom:link href="http://www.k-wave.org/forum/rss/topic/understanding-the-derivation-of-the-nonlinear-terms" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

		<item>
			<title>guillefix on "Understanding the derivation of the nonlinear terms"</title>
			<link>http://www.k-wave.org/forum/topic/understanding-the-derivation-of-the-nonlinear-terms#post-9005</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:59:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>guillefix</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">9005@http://www.k-wave.org/forum/</guid>
			<description>&#60;p&#62;I am trying to follow the derivation of the nonlinear terms in the wave equation used in k-wave, following the paper &#60;a href=&#34;https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22712907/&#34; rel=&#34;nofollow&#34;&#62;https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22712907/&#60;/a&#62;&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;However, I don't understand the justification of equations (3) and (4) in that paper. I understand we are assuming that the acoustic density, pressure, etc are small. However, (3) and (4) seem to need the displacement field, and the *time since t_0, where t_0 is the time where the fluid is at equilibrium* to be small. &#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;I don't see how this assumption could hold.&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;This doesn't seem to affect the derivation much, except for the term with displacement in the pressure-density relation. But that term matters for the eventual equation.&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;To elaborate on my confusion:&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;If we look at equation (4), that will only hold for very short times - surely shorter than we want to run our simulation, and therefore shorter than we want our equations to hold right??&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;But, this is ok, for equation (5). Equation (5) would still be valid for any finite time, if we have $\del{\rho}$ rather than $\del{\rho_0}$, and the displacement was small. However, we then see that the argument in the next line that $\hat{s(t_1)} - \hat{s(t_0)} = s$ and $\hat{s(t_1)} - \hat{s(t_0)} = p$, and that would change the equaitons very significantly.&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;So either a) For some reason, we only the equations to hold for short enough time than (4) is a good approximation, b) I am missing something about how this would extend for longer times, or c) I am missing something else??&#60;/p&#62;
&#60;p&#62;Thank you for the help!:&#38;gt;
&#60;/p&#62;</description>
		</item>

	</channel>
</rss>
