The Logic Behind Equating Differential Operators to Numbers in Electromagnetism

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the mathematical treatment of differential operators in the context of electromagnetic wave equations, specifically how the nabla operator (∇) is equated to the imaginary wave vector (ik) and the time derivative (∂/∂t) is equated to the negative imaginary frequency (-iω). This equivalence is established through the plane-wave ansatz, where the differential operators transform into algebraic relations in frequency-wavevector space, allowing for simplified problem-solving. Key references include textbooks by Abraham, Becker, Schwartz, and Griffiths, which provide foundational knowledge in electrodynamics and vector calculus.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus
  • Familiarity with Fourier decomposition of fields
  • Knowledge of electromagnetic wave equations
  • Basic concepts of complex numbers and imaginary units
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the plane-wave ansatz in detail
  • Learn about Fourier transforms in the context of electromagnetic theory
  • Explore the mathematical foundations of differential operators in physics
  • Review electrodynamics textbooks, particularly those by Griffiths and Schwartz
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on electromagnetism, as well as mathematicians interested in the application of differential operators in physical equations.

mertcan
Messages
343
Reaction score
6
hi, nowadays I try to get involved electromagnetic waves equations, and I came across that $$ \nabla $$ is treated like $$ ik $$ and $$ \frac {\partial } {\partial t} $$ is treated like $$ -iw $$ And if you look at the part painted with orange in my attachment, afterwards you can see that $$ \nabla $$ and $$ \frac {\partial } {\partial t} $$ is equated to the $$ ik $$ and $$ -iw $$ respectively. It is so weird because those operators are equated to a number. How is it possible? What is the logic of this situation ? Is there a proof of that situation?
I am looking forward to your valuable responses. Thanks in advance...
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
You should relabel your question as category B. I guess, it is also good advice to learn vector calculus first. A very good short summary can be found in many textbooks in electrodynamics, as in the textbooks by Abraham and Becker, Schwartz, or Griffiths.

In Cartesian coordinates the nabla symbol represents the differential operator
$$\vec{\nabla}=\vec{e}_x \partial_x + \vec{e}_y \partial_y + \vec{e}_z \partial_z=\sum_{j=1}^3 \vec{e}_j \partial_j.$$
For a plane-wave ansatz of an arbitrary field
$$\phi(t,\vec{x})=\phi_0 \exp(-\mathrm{i} \omega t+\mathrm{i} \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}),$$
you have, e.g.,
$$\partial_x \phi=\mathrm{i} k_x \phi_0 \exp(-\mathrm{i} \omega t+\mathrm{i} \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x})=\mathrm{i} k_x \phi(t,\vec{x}),$$
i.e.,
$$\vec{\nabla} \phi=\mathrm{i} \vec{k} \phi.$$
Thus for such fields you can indeed set ##\vec{\nabla} \rightarrow \mathrm{i} \vec{k}##.

The time derivative in the same sense is obviously equivalent to the substitution ##\partial_t=-\mathrm{i} \omega##.

This underlines the merit of the Fourier decomposition of fields: The vector operators in time-position representation become algebraic relations with ##\omega## and ##\vec{k}## (i.e., in frequency-wavevector space), i.e., the field equations become algebraic equations, and often you can solve problems by transforming the solutions of these algebraic equations back to time-position space.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
30
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K