EM Wave - Where Does the Energy Go?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the behavior of energy in electromagnetic (EM) waves, particularly in a vacuum. It clarifies that while the energy density oscillates according to the electric field's cosine squared function, the energy does not disappear when it reaches zero; instead, it is redistributed spatially. The conversation also addresses Poynting's theorem, explaining that the current density in the equation refers to any existing current, regardless of its origin. It emphasizes that the energy in EM waves travels forward at the speed of light and that each wave cycle operates independently, without needing to transfer energy between cycles. Overall, the energy distribution in EM waves is complex, with energy arriving in bursts rather than a steady flow.
Master J
Messages
219
Reaction score
0
For an EM wave in vacuum, we know the energy density is given by1/2 e E^2 for the electric field, with a similar expression for the magnetic (e is permittivity of vacuum). E^2 implies that the energy oscillates as a cosine squares function if we represent the E field as E_0.cos [ kx - wt].

But since cosine squared goes between 0 and 1, where does the energy go when it is at 0?? It can't be stored in the magnetic field since they are in phase in vacuum, so where does it "go"? I hope you can understand my question!Secondly, in Poyntings theorem for the conservation of energy with EM waves, the kinetic energy density is given by E.J. Does this current density refer to a current that the E field has generated AND/OR one that was already there?Cheers guys!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello, I'm only following an introductory course on electromagnetism myself (Griffiths-level), so I'm no authority, but I'll do my best to try and help!

Regarding your first question:
Not a very physically insightful answer, but I believe the standard answer on your question is "The amplitude is not zero everywhere at the same time", i.e. when you're at a certain x and you wait for the t so that cos(kx-wt) = 0, this just means the energy has "moved" to another x' where cos(kx' - wt) is NOT zero.

For your second question:
I'm not sure how you'd draw the distinction between a current generated by your electric field or not. Anyhow, the J in the formula is simply any current (density) that's there (in that point), no matter how it got there.
Too maybe help demistify the "E.J" expression:
we know the electromagnetic power on a particle is \vec F_{\textrm{electromagnetic}} \cdot \vec v = q(\vec E + \vec v \times \vec B) \cdot \vec v = q \vec E \cdot \vec v
and this gives us for the power density \rho \vec E \cdot \vec v, and \rho \vec v is exactly what we call \vec j.
So the E.J is just an indication of the (derivative of the) work delivered by the electromagnetic force on some charge, no matter how that charge got there
 
It doesn't go anywhere. The energy in a sinusoidal electromagnetic wave just happens to be zero some places and nonzero others. All of it travels forward with the speed of light.

You must be thinking that the first cycle of the wave somehow has the job of passing its energy back to the next cycle to maintain it, but that's not the case. Each cycle is independent of the others. You could have just one cycle! The amplitude is an arbitrary function, just as the amplitude of a sound wave is an arbitrary function or in any other solution of the wave equation. All that Maxwell's Equations tell you is that E and B are transverse, that B is perpendicular to E with amplitude related to dE/dt, and that the whole thing moves forward with velocity c.
 
The EM wave seems to be different from other waves. The energy seems to arrive in bursts, at the peaks of an EM wave because E and H fields are In Phase in the far field but, for sound etc, the Potential and Kinetic Energies are in quadrature and the energy in the individual oscillating parts is at a constant level.
Funny that, in and around a transmitting antenna, the KE and PE are in quadrature and there is a 'steady' flow of energy outwards- it just gets 'lumpy' as you get further away. I believe the Sums but I'd love a pictorial (yes - arm waving) explanation, too.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top