Deriving the wave equation using small perturbations

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the wave equation as introduced by Hannes Alfvén in his 1942 paper. The derivation begins with the assumption of a uniform magnetic field and introduces perturbations in the magnetic field, electric field, current, and velocity. The equations governing the system are simplified under the assumptions of infinite conductivity and negligible pressure contribution. The key equation derived is ##\frac{\partial ^2 \mathbf H'}{\partial z^2} = \frac{4\pi\rho}{H_0^2}\frac{\partial ^2 \mathbf H'}{\partial t^2}##, which represents the wave equation in this context.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Maxwell's equations
  • Familiarity with perturbation theory
  • Knowledge of electromagnetic wave propagation
  • Basic concepts of fluid dynamics in plasma physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of Maxwell's equations in plasma physics
  • Learn about perturbation methods in mathematical physics
  • Explore the implications of infinite conductivity in electromagnetic theory
  • Investigate the historical context and significance of Alfvén's 1942 paper
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in plasma physics, electrical engineers, and researchers interested in electromagnetic wave propagation and its applications in various fields.

JD_PM
Messages
1,125
Reaction score
156
Homework Statement
Given:

$$\nabla \times \mathbf H = \frac{4\pi}{c} \mathbf j$$



$$\nabla \times \mathbf E = -\frac{1}{c} \frac{\partial \mathbf H}{\partial t}$$



$$\mathbf j = \sigma(\mathbf E + \frac{\mathbf v}{c} \times \mathbf H)$$



$$\rho \frac{\partial \mathbf v}{\partial t} = \frac{1}{c}(\mathbf j \times \mathbf H) - \nabla p$$


Derive the following PDE (1D Wave Equation):



$$\frac{\partial ^2 \mathbf H'}{\partial z^2} = \frac{4\pi\rho}{H_0^2}\frac{\partial ^2 \mathbf H'}{\partial t^2}$$



Where ##H'## means a small perturbation of ##H##
Relevant Equations
Please see Homework statement
Note that the wave equation we want to derive was introduced by Alfven in his 1942 paper (please see bottom link to check it out), but he did not include details on how to derive it. That's what we want to do next.

Alright, writing the above equations we assumed that:

$$\mu = 1 \ \ \ ; \ \ \ \mathbf H = \mathbf B$$

Let me now make new assumptions:

1) $$\sigma \rightarrow \infty$$

2) The pressure contribution is negligible.

Then our set of equations reduces to:

$$\nabla \times \mathbf H = \frac{4\pi}{c} \mathbf j$$
$$\nabla \times \mathbf E = -\frac{1}{c} \frac{\partial \mathbf H}{\partial t}$$
$$\mathbf E = -\frac{\mathbf v}{c} \times \mathbf H$$
$$\rho \frac{\partial \mathbf v}{\partial t} = \frac{1}{c}(\mathbf j \times \mathbf H)$$

So at this point, my approach was to apply the curl of the curl method (please see bottom link for more details) to get the wave equation. But after more reading, one sees this is not the right method. We instead have to introduce perturbations

Let's assume that initially we have a uniform system where there is no velocity, no current and no electric field.

We assume that the magnetic field is uniform and equal to:

$$\mathbf B = H_0 \hat z$$

Note that all these assumptions were made by Alfven

We now introduce a perturbation of the magnetic field, the electric field, the current and the velocity:

$$\mathbf H = H_0 \hat z + H' \hat x$$

$$\mathbf E = + E' \hat y$$

$$\mathbf j = + j' \hat y$$

$$\mathbf v = + v' \hat x$$

While the density is assumed to remain constant. All the perturbed quantities are assumed to be
very small. Thus, the product of each other is negligible.

But once here how can I get ##\frac{\partial ^2 \mathbf H'}{\partial z^2} = \frac{4\pi\rho}{H_0^2}\frac{\partial ^2 \mathbf H'}{\partial t^2}## ?

Note: Any help is appreciated. I've been stuck in this derivation since November. I asked this question on MSE but got little attention. You also can find the paper on that post:

https://math.stackexchange.com/ques...tion-out-of-nabla-times-vec-h-frac4-pic-vec-j
 
Physics news on Phys.org

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
44
Views
6K