Calculating the Polarization of a Plane Wave in Electromagnetic Exercises

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the polarization of a plane wave represented by the complex electric field vector. The user is confused about determining the wave's polarization direction when the propagation direction is not aligned with the coordinate axes. They propose changing the basis to a non-orthogonal set of vectors, which leads to unexpected results regarding the coefficients. Another participant clarifies that the wave is indeed polarized and that the polarization direction is orthogonal to the propagation direction, suggesting a coordinate rotation for clarity. The importance of using orthogonal bases for accurate calculations is emphasized, as the proposed basis vectors are not perpendicular.
enpires
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello everybody :)
I'm doing some electromagnetic exercises, but I got stuck in calculating the polarization of a plane wave.
The complex field associated to the wave is the following
\vec{E} = (\sqrt{2}\hat{x}+\hat{y}-\hat{z})e^{-2\pi 10^6(y+z)} = \hat{p}e^{-2\pi 10^6(y+z)}
It is easy to calculate that the direction of propagation is
\hat{k}= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\hat{y}+\hat{z})
but now I want to calculate if the wave is polarized and how.

If the propagation direction was along one of the axis was pretty easy, I just need to look at the components in front of the exponential. But now that I can't how can I do it?

My idea was to make a change of the basis, from \{\hat{x},\hat{y},\hat{z}\} to \{\hat{u},\hat{v},\hat{w}\} where
\hat{u} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\hat{x}+\hat{z}) ,\quad \hat{v} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\hat{x}+\hat{y}) ,\quad \hat{w} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\hat{y}+\hat{z})
Then rewrite \hat{p} in this base, which became (I don't consider the square root factor, it doesn't change the result since I'm just looking how the components are related to each other)
\sqrt{2}\hat{x}+\hat{y}-\hat{z} = a\hat{u} + b\hat{v} + c\hat{w}= a (\hat{x}+\hat{z}) + b(\hat{x}+\hat{y}) + c(\hat{y}+\hat{z})

Which gives me values for all a,b and c. And that's strange (c should be zero since is a plane wave so there shouldn't be anything along this direction).

So... What's my mistake? :)
 
Science news on Phys.org
The wave is polarized - I don't understand what you mean by "how" it is polarized: the polarization direction is quite clear from the vector that precedes the exponent.

The polarization is indeed orthogonal to the propagation direction as required (easily checked by taking the dot-product). If you want to rotate p so that the propagation direction lies along a principal axis, you can always employ a coordinate rotation (which is more intuitive than employing a transformation to a non-orthogonal basis set IMO).

Claude.
 
\{\hat{u},\hat{v},\hat{w}\} are not perpendicular to each other.
 
Thread 'A quartet of epi-illumination methods'
Well, it took almost 20 years (!!!), but I finally obtained a set of epi-phase microscope objectives (Zeiss). The principles of epi-phase contrast is nearly identical to transillumination phase contrast, but the phase ring is a 1/8 wave retarder rather than a 1/4 wave retarder (because with epi-illumination, the light passes through the ring twice). This method was popular only for a very short period of time before epi-DIC (differential interference contrast) became widely available. So...
I am currently undertaking a research internship where I am modelling the heating of silicon wafers with a 515 nm femtosecond laser. In order to increase the absorption of the laser into the oxide layer on top of the wafer it was suggested we use gold nanoparticles. I was tasked with modelling the optical properties of a 5nm gold nanoparticle, in particular the absorption cross section, using COMSOL Multiphysics. My model seems to be getting correct values for the absorption coefficient and...
Back
Top