Inhomogenous electrodynamics wave equation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the wave equation for light from Maxwell's equations, particularly in the context of inhomogeneous electrodynamics. Participants explore the implications of charge and current densities, continuity equations, and the behavior of electromagnetic fields in different media.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a derived wave equation for the magnetic field and electric field, questioning the correctness of the constants and signs on the right-hand side.
  • Another participant notes a continuity equation for free charge, suggesting a relationship to the additional terms in the wave equations.
  • A third participant mentions that their derivation also relied on the continuity condition, implying that omitting it would introduce more terms.
  • This participant questions whether the conservation law is separate from Maxwell's equations, proposing that it is implied by them through a bivector form of Maxwell's equations.
  • A later reply discusses the behavior of charge density and current in dielectrics at rest, referencing literature that addresses the relationship between current and electric fields in static conditions.
  • This reply also introduces the concept of moving dielectrics and the complexities that arise, citing various formulations of Maxwell's equations for moving media and suggesting that deriving a wave equation in such contexts is unclear.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express some agreement on the derived forms of the wave equations but do not reach a consensus on the implications of the continuity equation or the complexities introduced by moving media. Multiple competing views on the interpretation of conservation laws and their relationship to Maxwell's equations remain evident.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about charge and current densities in different media, as well as the dependence on specific formulations of Maxwell's equations. The discussion does not resolve the mathematical steps involved in deriving the wave equations.

Peeter
Messages
303
Reaction score
3
I was playing around with some manipulations of maxwell's equations and seeing if I could work out the wave equation for light. I get:

[tex] (\nabla^2 -{\partial_{ct}}^2) \mathbf{B} = -\mu_0 \nabla \times \mathbf{J}[/tex]

[tex] (\nabla^2 -{\partial_{ct}}^2) \mathbf{E} = \nabla \rho/\epsilon_0 + \mu_0 \partial_t \mathbf{J}[/tex]

I had plenty of opportunities to mix up signs (and added back in some of the constants at the end) so I was wondering if anybody can confirm for me whether I got this (constants and signs on the RHS) correct.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I get about the same thing. There's a law of continuity for free charge:

[tex]\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t}+ \nabla\bullet J = 0[/tex],

which may be relatable to our extra terms. I have a book at home, "electrodynamics of moving media", I'll see if there's anything fundamentally interesting on this.
 
I tried a second way after posting this and got the same answer. However, both ways required that I use that condition, or else there'd be more terms.

A side note. Is this conservation really considered a separate law? It seemed to me that it's implied by Maxwell's equations. This can be seen for example by taking gradients of the bivector form of maxwell's equation:

[tex] \nabla^2 F = \nabla J[/tex]

Since the LHS is a bivector it means that the scalar parts of the RHS is a bivector. Thus:

[tex] 0 = \nabla \cdot J = \sum \partial_{\mu} J^{\mu} = \partial_t \rho + \sum \partial_i J^i[/tex]
 
Ok, I have some more information:

First off, the (free) charge density and (free) current are zero in dielectrics at rest, so they go away automatically. Landau & Lifgarbagez, in "Electrodynamics of COntinuous Media" (volume 8), has a little bit about conductors, where J is proportional to E in the limit of static fields. But they don't try and derive a wave equation in a conductor, although I'm sure someone has.

When a dielectric moves, one way to account for the movement is to allow the current to appear, because dipoles are crossing boundaries. Penfield and Haus, "Electrodynamics of Moving Media" covers this extensively, but they don't ever try and derive a wave equation. I suspect the reason is that E and D and B and H are not longer simply related. There are many "Maxwell Equations" for moving media, here's an example (the Chu formulation):

[tex]\nabla\timesE=-\mu_{0}\frac{\partial H}{\partial t}-\frac{\partial}{\partial t}(\mu_{0}M)-\nabla\times(\mu_{0}M\times v)[/tex]

[tex]\nabla\timesH=\epsilon_{0}\frac{\partial E}{\partial t}+\frac{\partial P}{\partial t}+\nabla\times(P\times v)+ J[/tex]

[tex]\epsilon_{0}\nabla\bullet E = -\nabla\bullet P + \rho[/tex]

[tex]\mu_{0}\nabla\bullet H = -\nabla\bullet (\mu_{0}M)[/tex]

From this, I suppose one could try and develop a wave equation for E or B, but it's not clear what the result would look like.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
999
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K