Show that the given electric field is a plane wave

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on demonstrating that a given electric field represents a plane wave. It begins with the definition of a wavefront and the manipulation of the cosine argument to establish a relationship involving position and time. A participant identifies an error in the rearrangement of the equation but acknowledges that it resembles the scalar equation of a plane. The conversation confirms that the derived equation indeed indicates a plane wave, emphasizing the simplicity of the conclusion. Overall, the participants agree on the relationship between the equation and the characteristics of a plane wave.
Blanchdog
Messages
56
Reaction score
22
Homework Statement
Show that each wavefront of the electric field forms a plane
Relevant Equations
## E(r, t) = E_0 \text{cos}(k(\hat{u} \cdot r - c t) + \phi)##
A wavefront is defined as a surface in space where the argument of the cosine has a constant value. So I set the argument of the cosine to an arbitrary constant s.

## k(\hat{u} \cdot r - c t) + \phi = s ##

The positional information is is in r, so I rearrange the equation to be

## \hat{u} \cdot r = \frac s k + ct + \phi = \text{const}##
## u_x x + u_y y + u_z z = \text{const} ##

And that's where I'm stuck.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You made a small error in the rearrangement, but once corrected the last line is almost right; that's the general equation of a plane of normal ##\hat{n}##, but ##\hat{u} \cdot r## depends on ##t## so isn't constant in time (that's why the plane translates).
 
ergospherical said:
You made a small error in the rearrangement, but once corrected the last line is almost right; that's the general equation of a plane of normal ##\hat{n}##, but ##\hat{u} \cdot r## depends on ##t## so isn't constant in time (that's why the plane translates).
Whoops you're right, I wasn't very careful with my minus signs since I knew it was all going to be wrapped up into a constant anyway.

It looks like my equation is in the form of the scalar equation of a plane... is it really that simple? I have the equation of a plane so it is a plane wave?
 
  • Like
Likes DaveE and ergospherical
Blanchdog said:
It looks like my equation is in the form of the scalar equation of a plane... is it really that simple? I have the equation of a plane so it is a plane wave?
Yeah, pretty much 😄
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Thread 'Minimum mass of a block'
Here we know that if block B is going to move up or just be at the verge of moving up ##Mg \sin \theta ## will act downwards and maximum static friction will act downwards ## \mu Mg \cos \theta ## Now what im confused by is how will we know " how quickly" block B reaches its maximum static friction value without any numbers, the suggested solution says that when block A is at its maximum extension, then block B will start to move up but with a certain set of values couldn't block A reach...
Back
Top