Deriving the Fresnel Equations for E Field in Plane of Incidence

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cummings
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fresnel
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the Fresnel equations for the electric field perpendicular to the plane of incidence. The original poster is struggling with a specific mathematical transformation referenced in an external link, which combines two equations to achieve the Fresnel equation. Another participant confirms the link works for them but cannot assist further and inquires about the class context. The conversation highlights the challenge of understanding the mathematical steps involved in the derivation. Overall, the thread emphasizes the need for clarification on the mathematical process to derive the Fresnel equations.
Cummings
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
I am trying to derive the Fresnel equations for the E field perpendicular to the plane of incidence.

There is one transformation, I assume involves some general math, that I am having a mental blank on.

It can be found here http://physics.tamuk.edu/~suson/html/4323/prop-em.html if you scroll down to Equation 7.17, they simply state that combining it with Equation 7.14 you can achieve 7.18, the fresnel equation.

I assuming this is just some substitution and re araging but for the life of me I am unable to figure out how they did. it.

Enlighten me.
________
Cummings
BSc: Photonics
BEng: Telecommunications and Internet Technologies.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I can't open that link. Will you double-check ?
 
Gokul43201 said:
I can't open that link. Will you double-check ?

hmm.. the link works for me.


sorry, can't help ya, but may i ask, what class is this for? EM II or optics or something? fairly interesting.
 

Thread 'Errors and significant figures'

I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
View full post »
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
View full post »

Similar threads

Are the Fresnel coefficients equal for E and B fields?
Replies
3
Views
1K
Fresnel's Equations/ Normal Incidence/ R and T coefficients.
Replies
4
Views
3K
Polarised light from fresnel's equation
Replies
2
Views
3K
Finding Fresnel coefficients from the interface conditions
Replies
1
Views
2K
Solving the Fresnel Equations with Polarization Parallel to Plane of Incidence
Replies
6
Views
5K
Fresnel equations at normal incidence
Replies
5
Views
9K
Derive Fresnel's Equations for Parallel Incidence using Maxwell's BC's
Replies
18
Views
4K
Derive the wave equation for fields E, B from the potentials
Replies
4
Views
2K
Fresnel Equations | Refractive Index Interface
Replies
1
Views
3K
Diffraction integral : incident field is FT?
Replies
9
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top