How can ellipticity angle be negative.

  • Thread starter Thread starter yungman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Angle Negative
AI Thread Summary
In plane wave elliptical polarization, a positive ellipticity angle indicates Left Hand Circular polarization (LHC), while a negative angle indicates Right Hand Circular polarization (RHC). The discussion centers on understanding how the ellipticity angle can be negative, with emphasis on the mathematical representation involving the arcus tangens function. It is noted that the sign of the arcus tangens is not fixed and can vary based on the wave's polarization. Participants seek clarification on how to visually represent a negative ellipticity angle. The conversation highlights the need for a deeper understanding of the relationship between the ellipticity angle and wave polarization.
yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
294
In plane wave elliptical polarization, the book said if the Ellipticity angle is possitive, it is a Left Hand Circular polarization(LHC). If Ellipticity angle is negative, it is Right Hand Circular polarization(RHC).

My question is how can Ellipticity angle be negative?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarization_%28waves%29

Can anyone show a picture of negative Ellipticity angle?

In case this sounds ridiculous, attached is the scan of the paragraph from the "Engineering Electromagnetics" by Ulaby. I have to scan in two part to fit the size limit. First is Ulaby1 and then Ulaby2.

Thanks
 

Attachments

  • Ulaby1L.png
    Ulaby1L.png
    46.7 KB · Views: 632
  • Ulaby2L.png
    Ulaby2L.png
    47 KB · Views: 756
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't see what is the problem with a negative ellipticity angle.
The sign of the arcus tangens is not fixed by it's argument, it can be either positive or negative. To decide which one to choose, you have to look at the polarisation of the wave.
 
DrDu said:
I don't see what is the problem with a negative ellipticity angle.
The sign of the arcus tangens is not fixed by it's argument, it can be either positive or negative. To decide which one to choose, you have to look at the polarisation of the wave.

The question is how to draw a negative ellipticity angle physically?
\chi\;=\;\tan^{-1} \frac {a_{\eta}}{a_{\epsilon}}
Both are just length and is never negative.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
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...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top