- #1

- 99

- 0

thanks

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter MadMax
- Start date

- #1

- 99

- 0

thanks

- #2

Dick

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 26,260

- 619

It usually means the perpendicular component of q relative to something.

- #3

- 99

- 0

Surely it can't mean relative to x because the dot product would imply that the term always = 0 right?

- #4

Dick

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

- 26,260

- 619

How could I guess 'relative to what'? I'd agree it's probably not x.

- #5

- 99

- 0

The equation I'm dealing with which contains this term is

[tex]\epsilon(\mathbf{r})=\frac{i}{q_z} \int d^2 \mathbf{x} e^{i \mathbf{q_\bot \cdot x}}[\epsilon_2 e^{iq_z[H+h_2(\mathbf{x})]} - \epsilon_1 e^{iq_z h_1(\mathbf{x})}][/tex]

I guess it could be perpendicular to r... but what difference would that make? What would it mean?

[tex]\epsilon(\mathbf{r})=\frac{i}{q_z} \int d^2 \mathbf{x} e^{i \mathbf{q_\bot \cdot x}}[\epsilon_2 e^{iq_z[H+h_2(\mathbf{x})]} - \epsilon_1 e^{iq_z h_1(\mathbf{x})}][/tex]

I guess it could be perpendicular to r... but what difference would that make? What would it mean?

Last edited:

- #6

- 13,033

- 588

It's probably perpendicular to the magnetic field intensity vector H.

- #7

- 99

- 0

But hmm perpendicular to H you say... that actually makes a lot more sense to me than any of the other variables if H were a vector, unfortunately its a mean separation, so that couldn't be it could it? I mean H is measured in a particular direction but... can you use that perpendicular symbol relative to something that's not a vector but measured in a particular dimension?

Cheers

- #8

- 99

- 0

well thinking about it this is a 2 D problem using a radial or cartesian coordinate system. The radial dimensions are expressed by **r** and the cartesian dimensions are expressed by **x**= x_x + x_z.

Saying that we are dealing with something perpendicular to**r** makes no sense to me in the context of the system to be honest. Since it has cartesian symmetry but no radial symmetry. Although I could be missing somthing since the equation comes from a fourier tranformation which I don't actually understand...

(a fourier transform of the system

[tex]\epsilon(i f, r) = \epsilon_2(i f)[/tex] when [tex]H + h_2(x) \leq z < + \infty[/tex]

[tex]\epsilon(i f, r) = 0[/tex] when [tex]h_1(x) < z < H + h_2(x)[/tex]

[tex]\epsilon(i f, r) = \epsilon_1(i f)[/tex] when [tex]- \infty < z \leq h_1(x)[/tex]

)

Saying its perpendicular to**x** is pointless. So I'm inclined to believe its either perpendicular to x_x or x_z. But which I don't know... :/ Nah actually though I bet if I actually understood the fourier transform I'd understand what that q is perpendicular to :/ Can anyone help please? :(

Saying that we are dealing with something perpendicular to

(a fourier transform of the system

[tex]\epsilon(i f, r) = \epsilon_2(i f)[/tex] when [tex]H + h_2(x) \leq z < + \infty[/tex]

[tex]\epsilon(i f, r) = 0[/tex] when [tex]h_1(x) < z < H + h_2(x)[/tex]

[tex]\epsilon(i f, r) = \epsilon_1(i f)[/tex] when [tex]- \infty < z \leq h_1(x)[/tex]

)

Saying its perpendicular to

Last edited:

Share: