Poynting vector and intensity in scalar diffraction theory

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between the Poynting vector, intensity, and scalar diffraction theory in electromagnetic waves. It establishes that the power density of an electromagnetic wave is proportional to the absolute square of the electric field |E|^2, with scalar diffraction theory allowing for a unified scalar wave representation. The conversation highlights the significance of polarization in interference and the limitations of scalar theory, particularly in high numerical aperture systems where vector diffraction theory becomes essential. The Poynting vector is noted for its association with momentum rather than energy density or intensity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of electromagnetic wave properties, specifically |E|^2
  • Familiarity with Helmholtz equations in linear media
  • Knowledge of scalar diffraction theory and its applications
  • Basic concepts of polarization and its role in wave interference
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of vector diffraction theory and its applications in microscopy
  • Explore the derivation of the relationship between |U|^2 and |E|^2 in scalar diffraction
  • Investigate the implications of polarization in interference patterns
  • Learn about the Poynting vector's role in electromagnetic theory and its relation to energy density
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, optical engineers, and anyone studying electromagnetic wave behavior, particularly in the context of diffraction and polarization effects.

ashita
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
The power density of an electromagnetic wave is proportional to the absolute square of the electric field |E|^2 (assuming a plane wave). Here, E is a vector so the absolute square involves all three of Ex, Ey, and Ez.

In homogeneous, linear media, it's easy to show that each component of E follows its own Helmholtz equation. This decouples the three components and allows one to define a unified scalar wave (usually U) that can represent any of the field components. This is the foundation of scalar diffraction theory.

In scalar diffraction theory, when people are interested in finding the intensity distribution at an image, they simply find |U|^2. A separate U is not found for Ex, Ey, and Ez. How is this an accurate representation of |E|^2, which includes all three field components? I have a Fourier optics book that claims these two quantities are directly proportional to each other, but I don't know how to show this.

Doesn't polarization play an important role in interference? When we apply Huygen's principle, why don't we worry about the polarization of the spherical waves at a point?
 
Science news on Phys.org
I remember reading some where that the lack of polarization role was very lucky for humanity, otherwise it would've taken many more decades to figure out interference.

The subtlety here is that the interference patterns doesn't arise from two particles. It's the wave function of a single particle that interferes with itself. I.e. the wave is interfering with something that has the same polarization.
 
ashita said:
T<snip>
Doesn't polarization play an important role in interference? When we apply Huygen's principle, why don't we worry about the polarization of the spherical waves at a point?

Usually when scalar theory is presented, the electric field is taken to be a plane wave (at least locally), and underlying that simplification the field is linearly polarized, and E ≠ 0 for only 1 component. Polarization is then 'recovered' by having 2 linearly independent field components.

The generalization of scalar theory, vector diffraction theory, is less commonly encountered but well-developed nonetheless. Vector theory becomes important for high numerical aperture systems, like microscope objectives.

I'm not sure I understand what the Poynting vector has to do with your question, although to be honest, I always associate the Poynting vector with the momentum of the field, not the energy density or intensity.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
992
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K