Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
Classical Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum Interpretations
Special and General Relativity
Atomic and Condensed Matter
Nuclear and Particle Physics
Beyond the Standard Model
Cosmology
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Other Physics Topics
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Classical Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum Interpretations
Special and General Relativity
Atomic and Condensed Matter
Nuclear and Particle Physics
Beyond the Standard Model
Cosmology
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Other Physics Topics
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Physics
Other Physics Topics
Confusion With Derivation of Fresnel Equations
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="bananabandana, post: 5459421, member: 490819"] [ATTACH=full]99979[/ATTACH] Okay, so I'm working with the diagrams above. ##i## denotes incident, ##r## reflected, and ##t## transmitted. -We're working in two HIL dielectrics. Incoming and outgoing waves are of form ##Aexp[i(\vec{k}\cdot\vec{r}- \omega t) ##. As I understand it, Maxwell's equations give four boundary conditions for this - Let: [LIST] [*]##\vec{\hat{n}}## be a unit normal vector to the interface, [*]##\rho{SC}## is the surface free charge [*]Subscript 1,2 refers to medium 1,2 [/LIST] Let's just look at the p-case: [LIST] [*] The parallel component of the ##\vec{E}## field must be continuous over the boundary. [*]But the perpendicular component is also continuous over the boundary, since we know: [/LIST] (1) $$ \vec{\hat{n}} \cdot(\vec{D_{1}} -\vec{D_{2}}) = \rho_{SC} $$ and in a dielectric, ## \rho_{SC}=0##, and since the dielectric is HIL - ## |\vec{D}| = \epsilon|\vec{E}| ## , i.e: (2) $$ \vec{\hat{n}} \cdot \epsilon ( \vec{E_{1}} -\vec{E_{2}} ) =0 $$ - For the wave to be continuous parallel to the boundary, we must have ##\theta_{incident} = \theta_{reflected} ##, as shown, and also that ## n_{1}sin(\theta^{i}) = n_{2} sin(\theta^{r}) ##. [Since the exponential terms must be equal]. So we can just work in terms of the amplitudes: Then, for parallel continuity: (3) $$ (E_{0}^{i}+E_{0}^{r})cos \theta^{i} = E_{0}^{t}cos \theta^{t} $$ And for perpendicular continuity: (4) $$ (E_{0}^{r}-E_{0}^{i}) sin \theta^{i} = -E_{0}^{t} sin \theta^{t} \implies E_{0}^{t} sin \theta^{t} = (E_{0}^{i} -E_{0}^{r}) sin \theta^{i} $$ Solving these simultaneously, we arrive at the result: (5) $$ r = \frac{E_{0}^{r}}{E_{0}^{i}} = \frac{ cotan \theta^{t} - cotan \theta^{i} }{ cotan \theta^{i} + cotan \theta^{2} } = \frac{ cos\theta^{t} sin \theta^{i} -sin \theta^{t} cos \theta^{i} }{ cos \theta^{t} sin \theta^{i} + sin \theta^{i} cos \theta^{t}} $$ Except this is wrong, since if ## n_{1} sin \theta^{i} = n_{2} sin \theta^{t} ##, then we can rewrite (5) as: (6) $$ r= \frac{n_{2}cos \theta^{t} - n_{1} cos \theta^{i} }{ n^{2}cos\theta^{t}+n_{1}cos \theta^{i}} $$ Which is not the result my lecturer gets! Can someone explain where I made my mistake? Would be very grateful! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
Physics
Other Physics Topics
Confusion With Derivation of Fresnel Equations
Back
Top