Proving general solution of Helmholtz equation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that F(k•r -ωt) is a solution of the Helmholtz equation, given the relationship ω/k = 1/(µε)^(1/2). Participants are exploring the mathematical steps required to demonstrate this, with a focus on the implications of the Helmholtz equation and the wave equation.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant states the problem and attempts to show that F(k•r -ωt) satisfies the Helmholtz equation by substituting k and r into the equation.
  • Another participant questions the clarity of the first participant's work, noting that it lacks detail.
  • A later reply reiterates the confusion regarding the substitution and asserts that ∇²F(xkx + yky + zkz) = 0 is incorrect, suggesting that this leads to a trivial solution.
  • There is a suggestion that the problem may actually require showing that F(k•r -ωt) is a solution of the wave equation first, before addressing the Helmholtz equation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not appear to agree on the correctness of the initial approach to the problem, with some expressing confusion and others challenging the validity of the steps taken. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the proper method to prove the statement.

Contextual Notes

There is uncertainty about the interpretation of the problem statement, particularly whether it pertains to the Helmholtz equation or the wave equation. Additionally, the implications of time dependence in the context of the Helmholtz equation are not fully explored.

physicslove2
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove that F(k•r -ωt) is a solution of the Helmholtz equation, provided that ω/k = 1/(µε)1/2, where k = (kx, ky, kz) is the wave-vector and r is the position vector. In F(k•r -ωt), “k•r –ωt” is the argument and F is any vector function.

Homework Equations


Helmholtz Equation: ∇2A+k2A=0

The Attempt at a Solution


I first completed the dot of k and r thus,
F(xkx+ yky+zkz)I am a little confused at this point, if I plug it into the equation I don't see how it would be 0
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It's not clear what you've done, since you haven't shown your work.
 
SteamKing said:
It's not clear what you've done, since you haven't shown your work.

I completed the dot between k and r within F.

k = (kx, ky, kz)
TA said to use r=(x,y,z)

thus the function becomes
F(xkx+ yky+zkz)

2F(xkx+ yky+zkz)=0, right?but then how would k2F(xkx+ yky+zkz)=0?
 
2F(xkx+ yky+zkz)=0 is not right. Because then, as you say, you would need k2F=0, which is the trivial solution.

It is a kind of weird problem in the first place, since the Helmholtz equation does not care about time dependence. Are you sure the problem wasn't to show that ##F(k\cdot r -\omega t)## is a solution of the wave equation, and to go on to prove that it is also a solution of the Helmholtz equation?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K