E field phase matching at interface, deriving Snell's Law

Cruikshank
Messages
82
Reaction score
4
I'm studying optics on my own and have gotten very stuck on page 75 of Klein and Furtak, the unnumbered equation. Specifically, I don't understand why there aren't arbitrary phase factors inserted; the equation does not look general enough. I checked in Jackson, 2nd edition Classical Electrodynamics, and on page 279 Jackson simply states in equation 7.34 that the phases have to match at the origin. There isn't much there, just a declaration, and I don't understand why it should be true. Any pointers?

I've gotten nearly everything else in that derivation, but really I must have written 50 pages of equations trying to solve these boundary conditions.

Incoming wave vector k = n - iK (propagation and attenuation) Reflected wave has double prime, transmitted wave has single prime. Klein and Furtak simply write (for E_t, t is tangential, consider it a variable for which x or y can be substituted:)

E_t*e^-i(k_x x) + E"_t*e^-i(k"_x * x + k"_y*y) = E'_t*e^-i(k'_x * x + k'_y * y)

The interface is the z=0 plane, so I see why there are no z factors. But I would have inserted arbitrary phases on E' and E". Why are they not needed?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Cruikshank said:
E_t*e^-i(k_x x) + E"_t*e^-i(k"_x * x + k"_y*y) = E'_t*e^-i(k'_x * x + k'_y * y)

The interface is the z=0 plane, so I see why there are no z factors. But I would have inserted arbitrary phases on E' and E". Why are they not needed?

IIRC, Griffiths gives a decent argument (middle of chapter 7 I think).
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top