Question in reflection and transmission at oblique incidence.

  • Thread starter yungman
  • Start date
  • #1
5,106
124
I am reading Griffiths p387. It is my understanding that
[tex]\tilde E(\vec r,t)=\hat r E_0 e^{j(\omega t-kr)}[/tex]
Where ##\vec r =\hat x x+\hat y y+ \hat z z## is the positional vector from the origin to the observation point ( x,y,z).
[tex]\Rightarrow\;\tilde E(\vec r,t)=\hat r E_0 e^{-jkr}\;=\;\left(\frac {\hat x x+\hat y y+ \hat z z}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2}}\right) E_0e^{j[-(\hat x k_x+\hat y k_y+\hat z k_z)\cdot(\hat x x+\hat y y+\hat z z)]}\;=\; \left(\frac {\hat x x+\hat y y+ \hat z z}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2}}\right) E_0e^{-j[( x k_x+ y k_y+z k_z)]} [/tex]


In Griffiths, he let the incident TEM wave travels in ##\vec k_I## direction. So he let
[tex]\vec E_I(\vec r,t)= \vec E_{0I} e^{j(\omega t - \vec k_I\cdot \vec r)},\;\vec E_R(\vec r,t)= \vec E_{0R} e^{j(\omega t - \vec k_R\cdot \vec r)},\;\vec E_T(\vec r,t)= \vec E_{0T} e^{j(\omega t - \vec k_T\cdot \vec r)},\;[/tex]
To expand one out:
[tex]\vec E_I(\vec r,t)= \vec E_{0I} e^{j(\omega t - \vec k_I\cdot \vec r)}=\hat x E_{0I}e^{j[\omega t - (xk_{Ix}+yk_{Iy}+zk_{Iz})]}[/tex]

I have a problem with this, as you can see from the scanned page, the direction of the incident, reflected and transmitted wave is in direction of ##\vec k_I,\;\vec k_R\;\hbox { and } \;\vec k_T##. But he gave all three as ##\vec E(\vec r,t)##. This mean all three are in ##\vec r## direction. That is not right.
Later, he actually equated
[tex]xk_{Ix}=xk_{Rx}\;\Rightarrow\;k_{Ix}=k_{Rx}[/tex]
This mean he used the same ##\vec r## in all three, that is questionable. I am not saying the final result is wrong, just the representation is questionable.
Please help.

Thanks
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
5,106
124
I think I got some of the explanation from Cheng's book that ##e^{\vec k\cdot \vec r}## is just to give ##e^{-jk_xx}e^{-jk_yy}e^{-jk_zz}=e^{-j(k_xx+k_yy+k_zz)}##.....which is like ##e^{-jkz}## in z direction.

But I still have a question. It is obvious that in the book, the incident wave is traveling in ##\hat k_I## direction, reflected wave in ##\hat k_R## direction and transmitted wave in ##\hat k_T## direction.

Why this book and other books all call ##\vec E(\vec r, t)## and not ##\vec E(\vec k_I, t)##? The incident wave IS traveling in ##\vec k_I## direction as indicated. Or this is just a general way of saying the direction of propagation has xyz components, not just z?
 
Last edited:

Related Threads on Question in reflection and transmission at oblique incidence.

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
720
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
10K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Top