Can a sinusoidal EM wave exist in nature?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the existence of sinusoidal electromagnetic (EM) waves in nature, exploring the characteristics of EM waves, their mathematical representations, and the implications of constant electric and magnetic fields. Participants examine theoretical aspects, practical implications, and the definitions of what constitutes a wave.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the possibility of an EM wave with constant electric and magnetic fields, suggesting that such a configuration does not represent a wave at all.
  • Others propose that a square wave could be a valid example, indicating that it consists of multiple frequencies combined.
  • There is a discussion about the definition of a wave, with some arguing that any shape derived from linear partial differential equations can be a wave, except for constant shapes.
  • One participant mentions that while a sinusoidal wave is a solution to Maxwell's equations, it cannot be realized in nature due to the infinite energy requirement associated with such a wave.
  • Another participant suggests that the misunderstanding may stem from misinterpreting a description of a plane wave.
  • Several participants emphasize the importance of citing sources accurately when referencing texts, indicating a focus on academic rigor in the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of EM waves, with no consensus on whether sinusoidal EM waves can exist in nature. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of waves and the unresolved implications of energy requirements for sinusoidal solutions. The discussion also highlights the need for precise citation practices in academic contexts.

rmberwin
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
I saw an example of a hypothetical EM wave that had constant E and B fields. Is that possible? How would it be produced? And wouldn't such a wave have an infinite wavelength?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If the E and B fields are constant, how is it waving? It doesn't sound like a wave of any sort.
 
rmberwin said:
I saw an example of a hypothetical EM wave that had constant E and B fields. Is that possible? How would it be produced? And wouldn't such a wave have an infinite wavelength?

Please describe the source, i.e. where exactly did you see this? We are trying to have members to get into the habit of citing their sources. And has V50 has mentioned, a constant E and B field is not an "EM wave".

I've had someone told me before of a square pulse having a constant E and B field, but this is nothing more than a severe error in understanding what a square pulse is.

Zz.
 
A EM wave like any other wave derived from LINEAR partial diff. eqns. can have any shape whatsoever except for constant because a constant shape isn't waving at all.
 
I saw it in one of the standard texts. I agree that technically there is no wave. But it is an electromagnetic disturbance, traveling at the speed of light. But if there's no wavelength, what is the color of the light?
 
rmberwin said:
I saw it in one of the standard texts. I agree that technically there is no wave. But it is an electromagnetic disturbance, traveling at the speed of light. But if there's no wavelength, what is the color of the light?

You must have misunderstood the text.
 
rmberwin said:
I saw it in one of the standard texts

Please tell us exactly what you read and where. It sounds like you're misunderstanding something, but without knowing what you read, it's hard to help.
 
  • #10
rmberwin said:
I saw it in one of the standard texts.

This is not a valid reference citation in PF. You need to cite: (i) author (ii) title of the text (iii) publication year (iv) page number.

You will have to use such similar formats when you write your term papers etc. So you might as well learn to adopt that style in this forum. It is one of the more valuable lessons you can learn by being here.

Zz.
 
  • #11
Waves don't need to be sinusoidal. Sinusoidal waves are merely a convenient mathematical decomposition. I'm not sure if there is a universal definition of what counts as a wave, but I would go with, "something that solves the wave equation". Several examples are shown in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_equation

This definition includes propagating waves and evanescent waves (which certainly aren't sinusoidal), and even constant waves (E = B = constant).
 
  • #12
Ironically, a sinusoidal wave, i.e., the plane-wave solution of Maxwell's equations for a free em. field,
\vec{E}(t,\vec{x})=\vec{E}_0 \cos(\omega t-\vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}), \quad \vec{k} \cdot \vec{E}_0=0, \quad \omega=c |\vec{k}|
cannot be realized in nature. That becomes immediately clear when you try to calculate the total energy of the electric field, which is infinity, and since we don't have an infinite amount of energy available, we can never create such a plane wave in the strict sense.

Of course, according to Fourier's theorem you can write any free-field solution in the form of a Fourier integral
\vec{E}(t,\vec{x})=\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \frac{\mathrm{d}^3 \vec{k}}{(2 \pi)^3} \tilde{\vec{E}}(\vec{k}) \exp[-\mathrm{i} |\vec{k}| c t+\mathrm{i} \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}], \quad \vec{k} \cdot \tilde{\vec{E}}(\vec{k})=0.
I've used the (complex) exponential form of the Fourier integral, because it's more convenient than the cos-sin form, but is of course equivalent.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
997
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K