Electric Field Divergence of Monochromatic Plane Wave: Why is it Zero?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the divergence of the electric field associated with a monochromatic plane wave, particularly questioning why it is considered to be zero. Participants explore the mathematical and physical implications of divergence in the context of Maxwell's equations and the representation of electric fields.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the divergence of an electric field is zero in the absence of charge, referencing Gauss' Law and Maxwell's equations.
  • Others clarify that divergence is a vector operator applied to vector fields, resulting in a scalar, and express confusion over the mixing of terms related to amplitude and vector fields.
  • A participant introduces the concept of representing the electric field as a complex vector amplitude, raising questions about its implications for divergence.
  • Some participants argue that while complex representations may be mathematically convenient, the physical interpretation requires taking the real part of the solution.
  • There is a contention regarding whether the divergence of a complex vector amplitude can be considered zero, with some participants suggesting that this question is based on a misunderstanding of the definitions involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the divergence of the electric field is zero in charge-free regions, as stated in Maxwell's equations. However, there is disagreement regarding the interpretation of complex vector amplitudes and their relationship to physical electric fields, leading to unresolved questions about the mathematical representation.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express limitations in understanding the distinction between complex vector amplitudes and physical electric fields, indicating potential misconceptions that affect the discussion.

zb23
Messages
27
Reaction score
2
Why is the divergence of an amplitude of an electric field of a monochromatic plane wave zero?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Alex Ford
Physics news on Phys.org
Humm... I don't think I understand your question.

Divergence is a vector function, not just amplitude, which is why we can use it on E-fields, which are vectors.

One of Maxwell's equations (Gauss' Law) says ∇⋅E=ρ/ε0; the divergence of any E-field is 0 unless it is measured over a region that encloses an electric charge.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
ampitude can be written as a vector compex function in most generalised way.
 
  • Skeptical
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50, Dale and DaveE
What does ## \nabla \cdot \bf D = 0 ## say?
(no charge density assumed)
 
DaveE said:
Divergence is a vector function, not just amplitude, which is why we can use it on E-fields, which are vectors.

The way you are saying this is a bit confusing. Divergence is an operator that can be applied to vectors; the result of applying this operator to a vector is a scalar.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DaveE and etotheipi
PeterDonis said:
The way you are saying this is a bit confusing. Divergence is an operator that can be applied to vectors; the result of applying this operator to a vector is a scalar.
yes. I was also kind of sloppy in mixing the derivative and integral forms when I said "measured over a region...".
 
Last edited:
PeterDonis said:
The way you are saying this is a bit confusing. Divergence is an operator that can be applied to vectors; the result of applying this operator to a vector is a scalar.
Right, so if I can say ## \nabla \cdot \bf E = 0 ## for any electric field E in the absence of charge, am I home or not?

So,question: can you say that? Did someone say it about 140 years ago?
 
rude man said:
if I can say ## \nabla \cdot \bf E = 0 ## for any electric field E in the absence of charge, am I home or not?

Yes.

rude man said:
So,question: can you say that? Did someone say it about 140 years ago?

Yes, it's the charge-free case of the first Maxwell equation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
So is divergence of a complex vector amplitude of electric field of a monochromatic plane wave always zero?
 
  • #10
zb23 said:
So is divergence of a complex vector amplitude of electric field of a monochromatic plane wave always zero?

I don't know where "complex vector amplitude" is coming from. In classical EM, the electric and magnetic fields are vectors with real components, and the divergence of the electric field vector when no charges are present, which will be true for an EM wave in vacuum, is zero by the first Maxwell equation.

If you ask "why" this is true, there is no answer beyond the fact that Maxwell's Equations have plenty of experimental confirmation within their domain of validity.
 
  • #11
I think you didnt understand me. My question is more mathematical than physical. When you derive solution for wave equation from maxwell equations, sometimes it is more general for you to write your solution for wave equation in the form of complex vectors, and then you take just real component. So, if I write my solution as E*e^i(wt-k*r), where my E is my amplitude written as complex vector and k,r are my wave vectors and radii vector, than if you put this solution for wave equation for monochromatic plane wave in gauss law in vacuum you ll get two parts, one of them if div (E), where E is complex amplitude.
 
  • #12
Griffits and Jackson, that is standard literature for classical electrodynamics, write general solution for wave equation for monochromatic wave in complex notation. Sorry if I am a little bit confusing. I hope I explained my troubles better this time.
 
  • #13
zb23 said:
if I write my solution as E*e^i(wt-k*r), where my E is my amplitude written as complex vector

Doing this is a convenience for calculation, but to get the actual physical answer at the end you're going to take the real part, since that's what has physical meaning. The divergence of the real part of ##E## is what is zero.
 
  • #14
I understand but E is not longer a vector field it is just an amplitude vector that doesn't have to satisfy maxwell equation.
 
  • #15
E is not a vector field that represent electric field*
 
  • #16
zb23 said:
I understand but E is not longer a vector field it is just an amplitude vector that doesn't have to satisfy maxwell equation.

zb23 said:
E is not a vector field that represent electric field*

If these statements are true, then your question about why the divergence of this ##E## is zero makes no sense. The only ##E## whose divergence has to be zero in charge-free space is the ##E## that appears in Maxwell's Equations.

In short, your question appears to be based on a misconception, so it is unanswerable. Thread closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
276
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K