Help with derivation of Malus' Law

  • Thread starter Thread starter member 731016
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivation Law
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving Malus's Law, specifically the relationship between the electric field amplitude before and after passing through a polarizer. The key equation discussed is E_trans = E*cos(θ), where E is the initial amplitude and θ is the angle between the light's polarization direction and the polarizer's axis. Participants clarify that the correct approach to find the transmitted electric field involves projecting the electric field vector onto the polarizer's axis. They also confirm that the intensity of the transmitted light is proportional to the square of the transmitted electric field, leading to the conclusion that I_trans = I*cos²(θ). The conversation emphasizes the importance of vector projection in understanding the behavior of polarized light.
member 731016
Homework Statement
Please see below
Relevant Equations
##I= I_{max}\cos^2\theta## Where ##\theta## is the angle between the direction of propagation and axis of polarizer
I am trying to Derive Malus's Law. My textbook says that an electric field as an amplitude ##E## before passing thought the polarizer and reduce to ##E_{trans} = E\cos\theta##.

I am trying to understand why this occurs my considering a vertically polarized light passing though a polarizer that is at angle ##\phi## to the horizontal. The red line in the diagram below is the polarizer axis.
1681794100965.png

However, from the diagram, ##\cos\theta = \frac{E}{E_{trans}}## which rearranges to ##E_{trans} = \frac{E}{\cos\theta}## however, the component of the light transmitted should be ##E_{trans} = E\cos\theta##. Could some please give me some guidance on what I have done wrong?

NOTE: ##\theta## could also be ##\theta_2## since ##(\cos\theta_1)^2 = (\cos\theta_2)^2##
1681794602815.png


Many thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
You chose to draw the dashed line horizontally, but you could have drawn it normal to the red line. How to decide?
##E_{trans}## is the component of E parallel to the polarizer angle.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
haruspex said:
You chose to draw the dashed line horizontally, but you could have drawn it normal to the red line. How to decide?
##E_{trans}## is the component of E parallel to the polarizer angle.
Thank you for your reply @haruspex!

True, I can see how drawing the dashed line normal to the red line agrees with the textbook. However, deciding why is very interesting.

I recall from the dot product, that to find the component of one vector on another, we must find the projection of one vector on another and that method we do is to draw a line from one vector that is normal to the other vector.

Many thanks!
 
BvU said:
Thank you for your reply @BvU!

Do you please know whether my dot product relation to find the electric field transmitted is correct? @haruspex you may also be interested in this algebraic derivation.

##\vec {E_{trans}} = \hat p \cdot \vec E## where ##\hat p## is the unit vector that is pointing along the slit of the polarizer from the origin.
##|\vec {E_{trans}}| = |\hat p||\vec E|\cos\theta##
##|\vec {E_{trans}}| = |1||\vec E|\cos\theta##
##E_{trans} = E\cos\theta##

Many thanks!
 
The textbook now says that the intensity of the wave is proportional to the amplitude squared.

Is it true that an EM wave is symmetrical in nature, so the amplitude is proportional to both the magnitude of the electric and magnetic field vector ##I ∝ E^2 ∝ B^2##? Conversely, is it true that ##|\vec E_{max}|= |\vec B_{max}|##?

Since we already have the magnitude of the transmitted electric field vector in terms of the magnitude of the initial electric field vector before passing though the polarizer, I think the choose the ##I ∝ E^2## relation.

So ##I_{trans} = kE_{trans}^2 = kE^2\cos^2\theta ## and ##I = kE^2##. Then we solve for the proportionally constant ##k## and set the two equations equal to get,

##\frac{I_{trans}}{E^2\cos^2\theta} = \frac{I}{E^2}##
##I_{trans}= I\cos^2\theta##

That is so cool!!

Many thanks!
 
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 .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top