Phase invariance of an EM wave in special relativity

quasar_4
Messages
273
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



So I'm trying to show for a specific, given EM plane wave in vacuum that

kx - \omega t = k' x' - \omega' t'

but I'm running into some difficulties. I'm hoping someone can show me where I'm going wrong. Here's the setup:

In the lab frame K, a plane EM wave traveling in vacuum has an electric field given by

\vec{E}(\vec{x},t) = \hat{z} E0 \cos{(\frac{k}{\sqrt{2}} (x+y) - \omega t)}

where E0, k are positive real constants, omega = ck

Homework Equations



Maxwell's equations
Lorentz transformation

The Attempt at a Solution



First I found the B field in K using Faraday's law. Then I used the standard transformations in Jackson to go from E, B to E', B' in the K' frame.

My electric field in the K' frame is

\vec{E'}(\vec{x},t) =\hat{z} \gamma (1-\beta) \cos{(\frac{k}{\sqrt{2}} (x+y)-\omega t)}

Now I want to use the Lorentz transformation,

x = \gamma (x' + \beta c t') \text{ , } ct = \gamma (c t' + \beta x')

to put E' in terms of the primed coordinates. If I understand Jackson correctly (he says phase of a plane wave is an invariant), then shouldn't we be able to demand that

\frac{k}{\sqrt{2}} (x+y) -\omega t = \frac{k'}{\sqrt{2}} (x'+y') -\omega' t'

?

I'm trying to prove this, doing simple substitution with x, y, t -> x', y', t', but I can't get the factors of k' and w' to come out correctly because of the square root of 2. I'm stuck at:
\frac{k}{\sqrt{2}} (x+y) -\omega t = \gamma \left[k x' (\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}-\beta) + \omega t' (\frac{\beta}{\sqrt{2}}-1) \right] + \frac{y' k}{\sqrt{2}}

I don't know my initial assumption is wrong, or the algebra is just tricky. Any help appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
quasar_4 said:
If I understand Jackson correctly (he says phase of a plane wave is an invariant), then shouldn't we be able to demand that

\frac{k}{\sqrt{2}} (x+y) -\omega t = \frac{k'}{\sqrt{2}} (x'+y') -\omega' t'

?
No, when he says the phase is invariant, he means

k_\mu x^\mu = k'_\mu x'^\mu

where k'^\mu = \Lambda^\mu_\nu k^\nu. Though the x and y components of k are equal in frame K, they generally won't be in K'.
 
Ok, thanks.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top