Plane wave in cartesian coordinates

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around expressing a plane wave in Cartesian coordinates, specifically focusing on a wave with an amplitude of 1 V/m and a wavelength of 700 nm, propagating in a direction defined by the angle θ from the x-axis.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the correct formulation of the wave function and the wave vector in Cartesian coordinates. There are attempts to clarify the relationship between the wave vector and the direction of propagation, as well as the need for spatial dependence in the wave expression.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with each other's contributions, questioning assumptions about the wave vector's direction and magnitude. Some guidance has been provided regarding the formulation of the wave vector and the dot product with position vectors, but no consensus has been reached on the final expression.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted confusion regarding the notation and the representation of unit vectors, which may affect the understanding of the wave's spatial variation. Participants are referencing their textbooks for clarification on the wave vector's direction.

nmsurobert
Messages
288
Reaction score
36

Homework Statement


Provide an expression in Cartesian coordinates for a plane wave of amplitude 1 [V/m] and wavelength 700 nm propagating in u = cosθx + sinθy direction, where x and y are unit vectors along the x and y-axis and θ is the measured angle from the x axis.

Homework Equations



ψ{x,y,z,t) = Aei(kx+ky+kz ± ωt)
k = 2π/λ

The Attempt at a Solution


im not finding many good examples on this but using the plug and chug method i came up with

ψ = Aei(.008(cosθ +sinθ) -ωt)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Notice how there is no space variation in your wave?

The general expression you want is: $$\psi(\vec r) = Ae^{i(\vec k\cdot\vec r \pm \omega t)}$$ ... for Cartesian coordinates, ##\vec r = (x,y,z)## and ##\vec k = (k_x,k_y,k_z)##.
 
i don't see the difference in what i posted and what you posted. you posted the dot product of the propagation vector and the unit vector. isn't that i what i did?
 
nmsurobert said:
i don't see the difference in what i posted and what you posted. you posted the dot product of the propagation vector and the unit vector. isn't that i what i did?
Maybe I missed it? You wrote:
##\psi = Ae^{i(.008(\cos\theta +\sin\theta) -\omega t)}##
Where is the x-y-z dependence? If you had done the dot product, wouldn't there be one?

Please write out what you got for the wave-vector ##\vec k##
 
thats where my mistake is. I am not sure what my k vector should be. I am looking through the text right now trying to figure it out.
 
Your wave vector should have magnitude ##2\pi/\lambda## and should point in the direction of propagation.
 
i did that. that's the .008 in my solution. 2pi/700
 
0.008 is the magnitude (in nm-1) - what about the direction?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: nmsurobert
well if there is no z component then its headed in the x,y direction. isn't that what the initial u tells me?
 
  • #10
should there be an x and a y in front of the cos and sin, respectively.
 
  • #11
That's right - the direction is the same as the direction of ##\vec u## ... since ##|\vec u|=1## you can write: ##\vec k = (2\pi / \lambda )\vec u## ...
Since ##\vec u = (\cos\theta, \sin\theta, 0)## you can write: ##\vec k = \frac{2\pi}{\lambda}(\cos\theta, \sin\theta, 0)##

##\vec k\cdot\vec r = \frac{2\pi}{\lambda}(\cos\theta, \sin\theta, 0)\cdot (x,y,z) = \cdots## ... carry out the dot product.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: nmsurobert
  • #12
ahh ok. what i did was (cosθx, sinθy) ⋅ (x,y)

so my x and y turned to 1's.

thank you!
 
  • #13
Ah - then there was a notation mixup:
If we define x = (1,0,0) etc, then r = xx + yy + zz while u = cosθ x + sinθ y and the dot product proceeds correctly.
You may be used to using i-j-k for unit vectors but you can see why you don't want to do that here.

[If you were thinking that x = (x,0,0) then that's a different kind of mixup and r = x + y + z ]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
10K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K