PDA

View Full Version : Uniform plane wave (help with a short walkthrough for a worked problem)


FrogPad
Nov26-06, 11:06 PM
I don't understand something on this problem:

Q: A uniform plane wave with \vec E = \hat x E_x propagates in a lossless simple medium ( \epsilon_r = 4 \,\,\,\, \mu_r = 1 \,\,\,\, \sigma = 0 ) in the +z-direction. Assume that E_x is sinusoidal with a frequency of 100 (MHz) and has a maximum value of +10^{-4} (V/m) at t=0 and z = \frac{1}{8} (m)

Write the instantaneous expression for \vec E for any t and z.

A:
Using \cos \omega t as a reference, we find the instantaneous expression for \vec E to be:

\vec E(z,t) = \hat x E_x = \hat x 10^{-4} \cos ( 2 \pi 10^8 t - kz + \psi)

Since E_x equals +10^{-4} when the argument of the cosine function equals zero, that is when:

2 \pi 10^8 - kz + \psi = 0

we have at t = 0 , z = \frac{1}{8}

\psi = kz = \frac{4 \pi}{3} \frac{1}{8} = \frac{\pi}{6}

My question follows from this:
Why do we introduce the phase unknown phase \psi and set E_x according to this. Why couldn't we do this instead,

A:
Using \cos \omega t as a reference, we find the instantaneous expression for \vec E to be:

\vec E(z,t) = \hat x E_x = \hat x E_0 \cos ( 2 \pi 10^8 t - kz)

Set the according t=0, z=1/8 so that,
\hat x E_0 \cos ( 2 \pi 10^8 (0) - k(\frac{1}{8}) = 10^{-4} and meet the initial condition of a max of 10^-4 with E_0 instead of setting E_0 originally and changing the phase.

berkeman
Nov26-06, 11:33 PM
I forget -- what is k in terms of lambda? It seems like the phi and the kz can influence the final equation under different constraints -- I could be wrong of course.

OlderDan
Nov27-06, 12:01 AM
I don't understand something on this problem:

Q: A uniform plane wave with \vec E = \hat x E_x propagates in a lossless simple medium ( \epsilon_r = 4 \,\,\,\, \mu_r = 1 \,\,\,\, \sigma = 0 ) in the +z-direction. Assume that E_x is sinusoidal with a frequency of 100 (MHz) and has a maximum value of +10^{-4} (V/m) at t=0 and z = \frac{1}{8} (m)

Write the instantaneous expression for \vec E for any t and z.

A:
Using \cos \omega t as a reference, we find the instantaneous expression for \vec E to be:

\vec E(z,t) = \hat x E_x = \hat x 10^{-4} \cos ( 2 \pi 10^8 t - kz + \psi)

Since E_x equals +10^{-4} when the argument of the cosine function equals zero, that is when:

2 \pi 10^8 - kz + \psi = 0

we have at t = 0 , z = \frac{1}{8}

\psi = kz = \frac{4 \pi}{3} \frac{1}{8} = \frac{\pi}{6}

My question follows from this:
Why do we introduce the phase unknown phase \psi and set E_x according to this. Why couldn't we do this instead,

A:
Using \cos \omega t as a reference, we find the instantaneous expression for \vec E to be:

\vec E(z,t) = \hat x E_x = \hat x E_0 \cos ( 2 \pi 10^8 t - kz)

Set the according t=0, z=1/8 so that,
\hat x E_0 \cos ( 2 \pi 10^8 (0) - k(\frac{1}{8}) = 10^{-4} and meet the initial condition of a max of 10^-4 with E_0 instead of setting E_0 originally and changing the phase.
If you used

\hat x E_0 \cos ( 2 \pi 10^8 (0) - k(\frac{1}{8}) = 10^{-4}

the maximum would not be 10^-4 and at t = 0 the maximum would be at z = 0.

FrogPad
Nov27-06, 02:31 AM
If you used

\hat x E_0 \cos ( 2 \pi 10^8 (0) - k(\frac{1}{8}) = 10^{-4}

the maximum would not be 10^-4 and at t = 0 the maximum would be at z = 0.

oooooooooooooooooohhhh :)

Thanks man, that definitely makes sense! I really appreciate it.

berkeman:

k = \omega \sqrt{\mu \epsilon}