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

AI Thread Summary
The divergence of the electric field of a monochromatic plane wave is zero in the absence of charge, as stated by Gauss' Law, which is a fundamental aspect of Maxwell's equations. Divergence is a vector operator that results in a scalar, and it applies to electric fields, which are vector quantities. The discussion highlights confusion around the concept of "complex vector amplitude," clarifying that in classical electromagnetism, electric fields are represented by real components. The divergence of the real part of the electric field is what is zero, while the complex amplitude used for calculations does not represent a physical electric field. Ultimately, the question posed is based on a misunderstanding of the relationship between the electric field and Maxwell's equations.
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 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 vanhees71
ampitude can be written as a vector compex function in most generalised way.
 
  • Skeptical
  • Like
Likes 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 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 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 etotheipi
Back
Top