Introduction to Space Physics by Kivelson and Russel is a nice book. Assumes you know upper division undergrad electrodynamics.
https://www.cambridge.org/highereducation/books/introduction-to-space-physics/BA017948E00BF032AA06D8D2BFD8062F#overview
Is more advanced than Boas, but less advanced (and much easier reading) than books like Courant and Hilbert, Morse and Feschbach. According to the authors, part of the book can easily be used for undergrads. The entire book is a reasonable read if you have taken a solid course in complex...
in what way are E and H parallel to each other? At least in simple media they are perpendicular.
That does not describe every book. For example, Field and Wave Electromagnetics by Cheng. I do think engineering-oriented texts are probably more likely to use E and H then physics texts. As an...
The two methods are related, but it depends on where the Laplace transform converges. I posted about this in a different thread awhile ago.
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/physical-significance-of-the-laplace-transform.971324/post-6174503
jason
Wrong. Consider ##\mathbf{V}_1 = y\mathbf{\hat{x}} + x\mathbf{\hat{y}} + y\mathbf{\hat{z}}##.
What reading have you been doing? Because I haven't seen the polarization field in any of your equations. If you want to use that form of the equation, the polarization field must be in your current...
Since you claim to understand phasors, why don’t you use them the same way as all other EEs I have ever worked with and gone to school with? Were you taught this method?
Of course, if ##\omega t## is real then ##\cos(\omega t)## is real and ##i \, \sin(\omega t)## is imaginary, so they are...
There are some fundamental limits on the bandwidth of small antennas that were proved many decades ago. The wikipedia page gives the references
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chu–Harrington_limit
Basically, small antennas have a high Q so are narrowband.
Jason
For the first issue, have you tried working out the math to show that the “transverse curl” of the transverse E-field is zero for a TEM wave? A free online book that shows this is
http://eceweb1.rutgers.edu/~orfanidi/ewa/
Look in chapter 9. My books are at work, but I am sure that I have a...
There is a link on the stat-mech/EM/optics module lists more texts, including an 'essential' book for the stat mech part (Blundell and Blundell). For EM they also list Lorrain, Corson and Lorrain, which is a nice alternative to Griffiths that has a more interesting selection of problems; as a...
Yes, I care that she learns the material, and I believe she basically did what you are describing. She usually starts from first principles for every problem whenever possible since it helps her understand what is going on, and she has a hard time remembering the conditions under which other...
Thanks for the reply. This question is just the one-step process, which was why my daughter became so confused - to her credit she decided to leave her solution anyway (before asking me about it) instead of changing it to agree with what she understood from the TA because it made more sense to...
This is my first post of a homework problem, and I am just trying to make sure I am not missing anything as I help a child who is taking a college class on this stuff this summer. And to be clear, just trying to help her understand stuff, not help her with the homework problem. So I won't go...
Thanks for the reply. I don't think I asked my question very clearly. I understand the definitions of ##C_v## and ##C_p##. What I don't understand is why $$\frac{dH}{d T} = \left(\frac{\partial H}{\partial T}\right)_P$$ is true.
The text derives C_p-C_v=nR for ideal gasses. They start with $$H = U + PV = U + nRT$$ for ideal gas. Since U is only a function of temperature for an ideal gas, the right-hand side is only a function of temperature so $$\frac{dH}{dT} = \frac{dU}{dT} + nR$$. Now the text does something I...