EM Waves Penetration: Frequency Effects & Atmospheric Limitations

AI Thread Summary
Higher frequency EM waves generally penetrate materials more effectively, but this is not a universal rule. For instance, microwaves can penetrate haze while visible light cannot, and visible light can enter the atmosphere while gamma rays cannot. The attenuation of EM waves in materials is influenced by reflection, multi-reflection, and absorption, with each factor contributing to overall signal loss. Reflection and absorption increase attenuation, while multi-reflection can also play a significant role. The relationship between frequency and penetration is complex and not always linear, depending on material properties.
Kyoma
Messages
95
Reaction score
0
When an EM wave has a higher frequency, it is able to penetrate materials more easily.

However, why does a microwave able to penetrate haze while visible light can't? Why visible light is able to enter our atmosphere while those of gamma can't?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Kyoma said:
When an EM wave has a higher frequency, it is able to penetrate materials more easily.
This is not generally true. E.g.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Water_absorption_spectrum.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
First assuming TEM mode (no field component in the propagation direction).

In addition to the above poster, the attenuation of a material could be viewed upon as the sum of three things
1) Reflection, at the first boundary of the material
2) Multi-reflection, inside the material between the boundaries of the material
3) Absorption in the material itself

1) and 3) tend to increase the attenuation and 2) increase it.
1) is often just a simple function of the different wave impedances of the two regions (that is from where the wave came from and into the material we are talking about).

The absorption (3) is highly dependent on the material parameters in our "shield material".
E.g. to attenuate low frequency magnetic fields, you need a material with a high permeability value. Also all of this is of course frequency dependent, HOWEVER you cannot assume it to be linear :-)
 
This is from Griffiths' Electrodynamics, 3rd edition, page 352. I am trying to calculate the divergence of the Maxwell stress tensor. The tensor is given as ##T_{ij} =\epsilon_0 (E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} E^2)+\frac 1 {\mu_0}(B_iB_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} B^2)##. To make things easier, I just want to focus on the part with the electrical field, i.e. I want to find the divergence of ##E_{ij}=E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij}E^2##. In matrix form, this tensor should look like this...
Thread 'Applying the Gauss (1835) formula for force between 2 parallel DC currents'
Please can anyone either:- (1) point me to a derivation of the perpendicular force (Fy) between two very long parallel wires carrying steady currents utilising the formula of Gauss for the force F along the line r between 2 charges? Or alternatively (2) point out where I have gone wrong in my method? I am having problems with calculating the direction and magnitude of the force as expected from modern (Biot-Savart-Maxwell-Lorentz) formula. Here is my method and results so far:- This...
Back
Top