Fresnel's Equations/ Normal Incidence/ R and T coefficients.

AI Thread Summary
Fresnel's equations at normal incidence are used to determine the ratio of refractive indexes between two non-magnetic, non-conducting dielectric materials, where equal energy is transmitted and reflected. The ratios of the electric fields simplify due to the non-magnetic condition, allowing the permeability to be considered as that of free space. The discussion clarifies that non-conducting does not imply that permittivity equals that of free space, as the medium can still be polarized, resulting in a different permittivity. The correct expression for the refractive index ratio can be derived, but key concepts regarding permittivity and permeability need clarification. Understanding these principles is essential for accurate calculations using Fresnel's equations.
binbagsss
Messages
1,291
Reaction score
12
The question asks to use Fresnel's equations at normal incidence to find the ratio of the refractive indexes of the two materials. We are told equal energy is transmitted and reflected and that both media are non-magnetic and non-conducting dielectrics.

So I know that the ratio of Er/Ei and Et/Ei are the same for this case, regardless of whether the electromagnetic wave is parallel or perpendicular to the planar interface .

In this case, we are also told both media are non-magnetic. So the ratios of Er/Ei and Et/Ei simplify further as ui=ut=u0

(where Ei is the incident electric field , Er reflected, ui the permeability of the media with the incident beam etc.)

Now I am then asked if one of the media has a relative permittivity of 16 ,what is the refractive index of the other media?

This is probably a stupid question, but if non-magnetic means to take the permeability to be the permeability of free space, then doesn't non-conducting mean to take the permittivity to be the permittivy of free space?

And n = (\epsilon_{r}\mu_{r})^{\frac{1}{2}}. So they would both be equal and equal 1 which is obviously wrong.

( I am able to follow the working to get the correct expression for the ratio of the refractive indexes, I'm just missing some key concepts clearly...)

Many thanks for any assistance !
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Nonconducting means no sustained electric current can be established. The medium may still be polarized which gives it a permittivity different than vacuum permittivity.
 
Thanks for your reply. Am i correct in thinking that non-magnetic means to take the permeability to be the permeability of free space ?
 
You can take the permeability equal to that of free space.

Note, that the Fresnel coefficients relate the amplitudes, both of transmitted and reflected waves to that of the incident wave, but the transmitted energy is not equal to the square of the transmission coefficient.

ehild
 
Deriving Clebsch Gordan Coefficents.

...
sorry, i don't think you can delete your posts
 
Last edited:
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top