Regarding transmission and reflection of EM-waves

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving a problem from Jackson's 'Classical Electrodynamics' related to the transmission and reflection of electromagnetic waves at an interface. The main confusion arises from the boundary conditions at the first interface, particularly regarding the inclusion of a reflected wave (E_4) from a second interface. Initially, it was argued that E_4 should not be included since it is not present at the first interface point. However, it was clarified that the incident wave is a plane wave with infinite extent, necessitating the inclusion of E_4 in the boundary condition equation. This realization resolved the confusion and helped clarify the application of boundary conditions in the problem.
Kontilera
Messages
176
Reaction score
24
Hello!
I´m trying to read Jacksons 'Classical Electrodynamics' and solving some problems. At the moment I´m stuck at problem 7.3. I started looking at suggested solutions (http://www-personal.umich.edu/~pran/jackson/P505/F07_hw11a.pdf) but I need some help I guess. Looking at how other people have done the boundary conditions at the first interface point (medium to air) with an electric field polarized perpendicular to the plane, they set up the condition of continuity as:
E_1 + E_2 = E_3 + E_4.
Where E_1 is the incident wave, E_2 the reflected, E_3 the transmitted, and E_4 the reflected wave of the second interface.

However the wave E_4 is never actually present at the first interface point! Why should we include this wave in the equation? It is reflected at the second interface point and then travels toward the medium again but at a distant point. Intuitional it seems to me that the boundary condition should be:
E_1 + E_2 = E_3.

Where does my logic fail? :confused:


Thanks in advance!
 
Science news on Phys.org
However the wave E_4 is never actually present at the first interface point!

Are you sure about this? Probably the assignment says that the incoming light wave if a plane wave, which means it has infinite extent in the directions perpendicular to the direction of propagation. Unless the wave is a beam narrower than the gap.
 
Haha of course! I don't know why I was so obsessed with thinking about the whole wave as a arrow... Now everything makes sense, thanks Jano! :-)
 
Last edited:
Great!
 
Thread 'A quartet of epi-illumination methods'
Well, it took almost 20 years (!!!), but I finally obtained a set of epi-phase microscope objectives (Zeiss). The principles of epi-phase contrast is nearly identical to transillumination phase contrast, but the phase ring is a 1/8 wave retarder rather than a 1/4 wave retarder (because with epi-illumination, the light passes through the ring twice). This method was popular only for a very short period of time before epi-DIC (differential interference contrast) became widely available. So...
I am currently undertaking a research internship where I am modelling the heating of silicon wafers with a 515 nm femtosecond laser. In order to increase the absorption of the laser into the oxide layer on top of the wafer it was suggested we use gold nanoparticles. I was tasked with modelling the optical properties of a 5nm gold nanoparticle, in particular the absorption cross section, using COMSOL Multiphysics. My model seems to be getting correct values for the absorption coefficient and...
Back
Top