PDA

View Full Version : Trying to understand a constant in the phase shift (or difference?) of 2 waves


fluidistic
Nov30-10, 12:24 PM
I'm reading through Hecht's book on Optics and I fail to understand something. I think it's the third edition, page 380, chapter 9 (Interference).
So he's talking about spherical waves emitted by 2 sources. He says that the waves can be written under the form \vec E _1 (r_1 ,t)=\vec E_{01} (r_1)} e^{i(kr_1 -\omega t + \varepsilon _1)} and \vec E _2 (r_2 ,t)=\vec E_{02} (r_1)} e^{i(kr_2 -\omega t + \varepsilon _2)}.
First questions: Hecht's was always meticulous writing \vec k \cdot \vec x for plane waves, now he dropped the vector notation? I don't understand why. Ok k and r are parallels in this case so \vec k \cdot \vec r =kr, but he never justified it, I find it very strange. I'm likely missing something. Any help to understand here will be very welcome.
Then he went to say "The terms r_1 and r_2 are the radii of the spherical wavefronts overlapping at P; they specify the distances from the sources to P. In this case \delta = k(r_1-r_2)+(\varepsilon _1 - \varepsilon _2)."
In case you wonder, P is just a considered point over a screen far away from the sources. \delta is the phase difference according to Hecht.
I do not understand why \delta is worth what it's worth. I realize that the difference in optical path of the waves emitted by both sources is \frac{(r_1-r_2)}{n} where n is the refractive index of the medium. How do you reach \delta form it?

tiny-tim
Nov30-10, 02:03 PM
hi fluidistic! :smile:
First questions: Hecht's was always meticulous writing \vec k \cdot \vec x for plane waves, now he dropped the vector notation? I don't understand why. Ok k and r are parallels in this case so \vec k \cdot \vec r =kr, but he never justified it, I find it very strange. I'm likely missing something. Any help to understand here will be very welcome.

(it would be k.x = kr, not k.r = kr :wink:)

because it would be complicated and confusing …

the point P is at x, say, but r1 and r2 are measured from two different points, x1 and x2 say …

so the exponent would have a k.(x - x1) and k.(x - x2) …

it would look really unhelpful :redface:
Then he went to say "The terms r_1 and r_2 are the radii of the spherical wavefronts overlapping at P; they specify the distances from the sources to P. In this case \delta = k(r_1-r_2)+(\varepsilon _1 - \varepsilon _2)."

I do not understand why \delta is worth what it's worth.

he's looking at a fixed point x and seeing how the two phases differ, as a function of t …

r1 and r2 are (generally) measured along different lines, so you're not going to get something simple like (r1 - r2)/n :smile:

fluidistic
Nov30-10, 04:34 PM
hi fluidistic! :smile:


(it would be k.x = kr, not k.r = kr :wink:)

because it would be complicated and confusing …

the point P is at x, say, but r1 and r2 are measured from two different points, x1 and x2 say …

so the exponent would have a k.(x - x1) and k.(x - x2) …

it would look really unhelpful :redface:

Thanks for your reply. Ok I understand this, though the \vec k aren't parallel I think so I'm guessing that your last equation is an approximation (that is, assuming that the screen and the point P are very far from the sources so that the k vectors can be considered as parallel).
he's looking at a fixed point x and seeing how the two phases differ, as a function of t …

r1 and r2 are (generally) measured along different lines, so you're not going to get something simple like (r1 - r2)/n :smile:
Hmm ok but I'm not able to show it mathematically. Can you help me on that?

tiny-tim
Dec1-10, 04:42 AM
hi fluidistic! :smile:

(just got up :zzz: …)
hmm ok but I'm not able to show it mathematically. Can you help me on that?

you seem determined to use vectors :confused: …

it really isn't helpful for spherically symmetric waves like this …

Hecht uses k.x for plane waves, but scalar k for spherical ones because each simplifies the maths for that case

using the scalar k (as in your first post) is completely accurate, and gives you the phase difference immediately :wink: