Plane waves: sign of Re(ε), Re(μ) in passive media, attenuation angle

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the propagation of plane waves in a specific passive medium characterized by linearity, homogeneity, isotropy, and temporal dispersion. The key issue raised is the interpretation of the attenuation angle, which is stated to be 90° or lower due to the relationship between the attenuation vector and the phase vector. A critical point of contention involves the imaginary part of the product of permittivity and permeability, specifically whether the real parts of these quantities are positive in a passive medium. The conversation also touches on the implications of spatial dispersion and its relation to the medium's magnetic response. Overall, the participants seek clarity on the conditions that define the behavior of the medium's electromagnetic properties.
eliotsbowe
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Hello,
I'm having some issues with plane waves propagating through a medium which is:
- linear
- spatially and temporally homogeneous
- spatially non-dispersive
- isotropic
- temporally dispersive
- passive

I know that permittivity, permeability and the k-vector are complex in temporally dispersive media.

There are different notations of the above-mentioned quantities, so I'm going to briefly introduce those which I'm used to:
\epsilon (\omega) = \epsilon ' (\omega) - j \epsilon''(\omega)\mu (\omega) = \mu ' (\omega) - j \mu''(\omega)\underline{k} = \underline{\beta} - j \underline{\alpha}\underline{k} \cdot \underline{k} = \omega^2 \epsilon \muWhere\epsilon'' , \mu'' \geq 0 in a passive medium and \alpha>0.

During class, my professor stated that, in the medium in question, the so-called "attenuation angle" (the angle between the attenuation vector alpha and the phase vector beta) is 90° or lower, because:\underline{\alpha} \cdot \underline{\beta} \geq0
The statement was derived from the following equation:
(\underline{\beta} - j \underline{\alpha}) (\underline{\beta} - j \underline{\alpha}) = \omega^2 \epsilon \mu
(Tearing Re[] and Im[] apart we have:)
[PLAIN]http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/706/immagine1iz.png

My professor said Im[\epsilon \mu] < 0 and my issue is right here.
I carried out the product:
\epsilon \mu = (\epsilon ' - j \epsilon'' ) (\mu' - j \mu'') = \epsilon' \mu' - j \epsilon' \mu'' - j \epsilon'' \mu' - \epsilon'' \mu''Im[\epsilon \mu] = - \epsilon' \mu'' - \epsilon'' \mu'

Mu'' and epsilon'' are non-negative, but what about mu' and epsilon' ?
Are they both positive in a passive medium?

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
A magnetic response of a medium is equivalent to spatial dispersion as i omega E=rot B whence a material with mu different from mu_0 can always be described as a material with mu=mu_0 and a k dependent epsilon (that is, spatial dispersion), at least at non-zero frequency.
However, I don't see that the answer to your question depends on the medium being non-dispersive. So if you write mu=mu_0, this implies that mu''=0.
Epsilon will then be a function of k but still epsilon''>0. Hence epsilon'' mu' <0 which is all you need.
 
In that case, the inequality would be prooved. But my problem is: no approximation was made about epsilon and mu.
 
Well, that was some helpful pdf. Thanks!
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top