Plane EM wave in a vacuum, quick identity question

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a plane electromagnetic wave in a vacuum, specifically focusing on the relationship between the electric field E and the magnetic field B as described by Maxwell's equations. The original poster seeks clarification on a specific equation related to the curl of the electric field and its connection to the magnetic field.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the derivation of the equation ∇×E = i k × E, questioning its obviousness and the steps needed to confirm its validity. There is discussion on writing out the curl in determinant form and comparing components.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the mathematical expressions and exploring the implications of Maxwell's equations. Some express uncertainty about the clarity of the relationship between the fields and the curl operation, while others provide insights into the interpretation of the exercise and its requirements.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on understanding the derivation and implications of the equations involved, with participants noting the need for a deeper conviction beyond mere inspection of the results. The discussion reflects a learning process focused on the mathematical foundations of electromagnetic theory.

binbagsss
Messages
1,291
Reaction score
12
Okay the question is, given a plane electromagnetic wave in a vacuum given by E=(Ex,Ey,Ez)exp^{(i(k_{x}x+k_{y}y+k_{z}z-wt)} and B=(Bx,By,Bz)exp^{(i(k_{x}x+k_{y}y+k_{z}z-wt)} ,
where k = (kx,ky,kz),
to show that kXE=wB.

So I'm mainly fine with the method. I can see the maxwell's equaion ∇XE=-dB/dt, is the equation required.
-dB/dt=iwB.
And using ∇XE=ikXE, [1], the result follows.
My question is identifying equation [1]. How do you deduce this? Is it supposed to be obvious in any way. (I've done a check on the LHS and RHS so I can see its true), but should this be obvious?

Thanks in advance for your assistance .
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Deduce, deduce? How would you write out ∇xE if ∇= ##( {d\over dx}, {d\over dy}, {d\over dz}) ## and ##\vec E = \Bigl( E_x \exp ({i(k_{x}x+k_{y}y+k_{z}z-wt)}) , E_y \exp(i(k_{x}x+k_{y}y+k_{z}z-wt)) , E_y \exp(i(k_{x}x+k_{y}y+k_{z}z-wt))\Bigr)## where ##\vec E =(E_x, E_y, E_z)## is a constant vector.
You don't even have to carry out the cross product. Only the diferentiation.
 
I'm not seeing it to be honest. I'm writing out ∇xE in determinant form.
 
Determinant form has $$\left \vert \matrix{\hat \imath&\hat \jmath&\hat k\cr {d\over dx}&{d\over dy}&{d\over dz}\cr E_x &E_y &E_z }\right \vert $$ if I remember well.
Write out e.g the x component and compare with the x-component of ##\vec k\times\vec E##, etc.
 
In the bottom line of my first post - I've done this. But it's still not obvious to me until I do this?
 
Ah, I see. You did it, you see it's correct by inspection, but apparently you need something more to be really convinced ?

I can see the maxwell's equation ∇XE=-dB/dt, is the equation required.
Looks to me as if you are interpreting "required" somewhat unusual.

My interpretation of the exercise is more like: here we have an expression for ##\vec E(\vec x,t)## and ##\vec B(\vec x,t)## that we propose as a solution for Faraday's law (i.e. one of the Maxwell equations). And you are asked to make a few steps towards confirming it satisfies this equation -- under certain conditions for (Ex,Ey,Ez), (Bx,By,Bz), ##\vec k## and ##\omega##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K