Solution to the scalar wave equation in cylindrical coordinates

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that a specific function is a solution to the scalar wave equation in cylindrical coordinates. Participants explore the mathematical framework of the wave equation and the properties of Bessel functions, along with their derivatives and implications in the context of the equation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the scalar wave equation in cylindrical coordinates and proposes a solution involving Bessel functions.
  • Another participant suggests rewriting the Bessel differential equation to facilitate the evaluation of derivatives of the proposed solution.
  • A subsequent reply breaks down the proposed solution into separate functions for radial, angular, and axial components, and attempts to derive the wave equation from these components.
  • Concerns are raised about a missing term in the wave equation, prompting a reevaluation of the derived expressions.
  • After addressing the missing term, a participant reformulates the equation and identifies it as the Bessel differential equation, questioning the conditions imposed on the parameters involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants engage in a collaborative exploration of the problem, with some points of confusion and correction, but no consensus is reached on the implications of the derived conditions or the correctness of the approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the implications of certain conditions on the parameters, particularly the relationship between \(k_z^2\) and \(k_\rho^2\), and the overall validity of the proposed solution remains unresolved.

IridescentRain
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hello.

I don't know how to prove that a certain function is a solution to the scalar wave equation in cylindrical coordinates.

The scalar wave equation is
\left(\nabla^2+k^2\right)\,\phi(\vec{r})=0,which in cylindrical coordinates is
\frac{1}{\rho}\frac{\partial}{\partial\rho}\left(\rho\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial\rho}\right)+\frac{1}{\rho^2}\frac{\partial^2\phi}{\partial \varphi^2}+\frac{\partial^2\phi}{\partial z^2},where the translation between cartesian and cylindrical coordinates is given by \rho=\sqrt{x^2+y^2}, \varphi=\arctan\left(y/x\right), z=z.

According to Scattering of electromagnetic waves: theories and applications by Tsang L, Kong J A and Ding K-H, a solution to this is the function
\phi(\vec{r})=J_n\left(k_\rho \rho\right)\,e^{i\left(n \varphi+k_z z\right)},where k^2=k_\rho^2+k_z^2, n\in\mathbb{Z}, and J_n is the first-kind Bessel function of the n-th order.

I know very little about Bessel functions. I do know, however, that
J_n(x)=\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^m}{m!\,\Gamma(m+n+1)}\left(\frac{x}{2}\right)^{2m+n},which, by writing \Gamma(m+n+1) explicitly, becomesJ_n(x)=\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^m}{m!\,\int_0^{\infty} t^{m+n}\,e^{-t}\,dt}\left(\frac{x}{2}\right)^{2m+n}.I also know that
\frac{d}{dx}J_n(x)=\frac{1}{2}\left[J_{n-1}(x)-J_{n+1}(x)\right].
So I set out to prove that this is indeed a solution to the wave equation in cylindrical coordinates. However, I didn't get very far. Here's what I did:
\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial\rho}=\frac{k_\rho}{2}\left[J_{n-1}(k_\rho \rho)-J_{n+1}(k_\rho \rho)\right]\,e^{i\,(n \varphi+k_z z)}\Rightarrow\left(\nabla^2+k^2\right)\,\phi=\frac{1}{\rho}\frac{\partial}{\partial \rho}\left[\frac{k_\rho \rho}{2}J_{n-1}(k_\rho \rho)-\frac{k_\rho \rho}{2}J_{n+1}(k_\rho \rho)\right]\,e^{i\,(n \varphi+k_z z)}-\left(\frac{n^2}{\rho^2}+k_z^2\right)\,J_n(k_\rho \rho)\,e^{i\,(n \varphi+k_z z)}\Rightarrow\left(\nabla^2+k^2\right)\,\phi=\left[\frac{k_\rho^2}{4}J_{n-2}(k_\rho \rho)+\frac{k_\rho}{2\rho}J_{n-1}(k_\rho \rho)-\left(\frac{k_\rho^2}{2}+k_z^2+\frac{n^2}{\rho^2}\right)\,J_n(k_\rho \rho)-\frac{k_\rho}{2\rho}J_{n+1}(k_\rho \rho)-\frac{k_\rho^2}{4}J_{n+2}(k_\rho \rho)\right]\,e^{i\,(n \varphi+k_z z)}.However, I don't know where to go from here.

If I do
\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial\rho}=\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^m}{m!\,\int_0^{\infty} t^{m+n}\,e^{-t}\,dt}\left(\frac{k_\rho}{2}\right)^{2m+n}\,(2m+n)\,\rho^{2m+n-1}\,e^{i\,(n \varphi+k_z z)},I get stuck as well.

How should I approach the problem of proving that the above function \phi(\vec{r}) is a solution to the wave equation in cylindrical coordinates?

Thanks! :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The solutions to the differential equation

x^2 \frac{d^2 y}{d x^2}+ x \frac{d y}{d x} + (x^2-n^2) y = 0

are J_n (x) and Y_n (x).

You can also rewrite the Bessel Differential Equation as

\frac{d^2 y}{d x^2}+ \frac{1}{x} \frac{d y}{d x} + (1-\frac{n^2}{x^2}) y = 0.

Evaluate the derivatives of \phi and z first, then try and rewrite the resulting differential equation in r in the above form.
 
Hey! Thanks for your help.

All right, I have
\phi(\vec{r})=R(\rho)\,\Phi(\varphi)\,Z(z),where
R(\rho)=J_n(k_\rho\rho),\Phi(\varphi)=e^{in\varphi},Z(z)=e^{ik_zz}.
Therefore,
\frac{1}{\rho^2}\frac{\partial^2\phi}{\partial\varphi^2}=-\frac{n^2}{\rho^2}\phi,\frac{\partial^2\phi}{\partial z^2}=-k_z^2\,\phi,\frac{1}{\rho}\frac{\partial}{\partial\rho}\left(\rho\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial\rho}\right)=\frac{1}{\rho}\frac{\partial (k_\rho\rho)}{\partial\rho}\frac{\partial}{\partial(k_\rho\rho)} \left(\rho \frac{\partial(k_\rho\rho)}{\partial\rho}\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial(k_\rho\rho)}\right)=k_\rho^2\frac{\partial^2\phi}{\partial(k_\rho\rho)^2}+ \frac{k_\rho}{\rho} \frac{\partial\phi}{\partial(k_\rho\rho)}.
Putting all three together, I get
\left[k_\rho^2\frac{d^2R}{d(k_\rho\rho)^2}+\frac{k_\rho}{\rho}\frac{dR}{d (k_\rho \rho)}\right]\,\Phi\,Z+R\frac{1}{\rho^2}\frac{d^2\Phi}{d\varphi^2}Z+R\,\Phi\frac{d^2Z}{dz^2}=\left[k_\rho^2\frac{d^2R}{d(k_\rho\rho)^2}+\frac{k_\rho}{\rho}\frac{dR}{d (k_\rho \rho)}\right]\,\Phi\,Z-\left[\frac{n^2}{\rho^2}+k_z^2\right]\,R\,\Phi\,Z=0.
Let x:=k_\rho\rho. Since \Phi(\varphi) and Z(z) are never zero and k_\rho\neq0, I may divide everything by k_\rho^2\,\Phi\,Z:
\frac{d^2R}{dx^2}+\frac{1}{x}\frac{dR}{dx}-\left[\frac{n^2}{x^2}+\frac{k_z^2}{k_\rho^2}\right]\,R=0.
Comparing this with the equation you provided, R(x)=J_n(x) only if k_z^2/k_\rho^2=-1, which is a really strange condition to impose on k (recall that k^2=k_\rho^2+k_z^2; if I impose k_z^2/k_\rho^2=-1, then k^2=k_\rho^2-k_\rho^2=0, which is surely very silly).

What am I doing wrong?

Thanks again.
 
You left out the k ^2 \phi term in the equation
(\nabla ^2+k^2) \phi =0
 
But of course!

So
\left[k_\rho^2\frac{d^2R}{d(k_\rho\rho)^2}+\frac{k_\rho}{\rho}\frac{dR}{d (k_\rho \rho)}\right]\,\Phi\,Z-\left[\frac{n^2}{\rho^2}+k_z^2\right]\,R\,\Phi\,Z+\left(k_\rho^2+k_z^2\right)\,R\,\Phi\,Z=0;dividing by k+\rho^2\,\Phi\,Z,
\frac{d^2R}{dx^2}+\frac{1}{x}\frac{dR}{dx}-\left[\frac{n^2}{x^2}+\frac{k_z^2}{k_\rho^2}-\frac{k_\rho^2+k_z^2}{k_\rho^2}\right]\,R=\frac{d^2R}{dx^2}+\frac{1}{x}\frac{dR}{dx}+\left[1-\frac{n^2}{x^2}\right]\,R=0,which is the Bessel differential equation.

I completely forgot about that k^2 in the original wave equation. Thanks for pointing it out!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K