Why is the Poynting Vector defined as E x B?

AI Thread Summary
The Poynting Vector, defined as S = 1/u(E x B), indicates the direction of electromagnetic wave propagation, with the electric field (E) and magnetic field (B) components oriented perpendicularly. The discussion centers on the relationship between E and B, questioning whether the orientation of these fields is experimentally determined or a mathematical necessity. It highlights that Maxwell's equations impose constraints on electromagnetic waves, such as the requirement for certain components to equal zero in a vacuum. The mathematical relationships derived from these equations, including the wave equation, support the established orientation of E and B fields. Understanding this relationship is crucial for comprehending electromagnetic wave behavior.
Usaf Moji
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
Poynting Vector is by definition:

S = 1/u(E x B), where S points in the direction of the EM wave's motion.

In other words, for an EM wave moving from left to right, the electric field component always points up as the magnetic field component hits us in the face, and conversely, the electric field component always points down as the magnetic field components moves away from us into the page.

My question is, how was this constant relative position of the B field to the E field determined, i.e. was it experimentally determined, or is it a necessary mathematical consequence of other formulae? In other words, why is it E x B instead of B x E? Is this just the way EM fields are measured to be, or is their some logical/mathematical reason for it?

All responses appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We know from Maxwell's equations in vacuum that the Laplacian(E) = UoEo*(d^2E/dt^2) and similarly for Laplacian(B) = UoEod^2B/dt.

These satisfy the wave equation. However, Maxwell's equations add constraints to the waves.

For instance, a wave traveling in the z driection Ez and Bz must equal zero to satisfy div(E) = div(B) = 0. (Waves are in a vacuum so div(E) = 0).

Also del X E also tells us that Bo = k/w(z X Eo) which is the relation you were discussing.
 
Oh and sorry about the messy notation, I don't know LaTex.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
I passed a motorcycle on the highway going the opposite direction. I know I was doing 125/km/h. I estimated that the frequency of his motor dropped by an entire octave, so that's a doubling of the wavelength. My intuition is telling me that's extremely unlikely. I can't actually calculate how fast he was going with just that information, can I? It seems to me, I have to know the absolute frequency of one of those tones, either shifted up or down or unshifted, yes? I tried to mimic the...
Back
Top