I Sum of the dot product of complex vectors

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the summation of components in complex vectors, specifically how to derive the expression for the total electric field vector, ##\widetilde{\vec{E_t}}##, from its components. The user is attempting to understand the relationship between the complex vector representation and its projection onto a specific direction, ##\hat{e_p}##. There is confusion regarding the notation used, particularly the definition of ##e_{p}*##, which is questioned as being a scalar rather than a vector. The user expresses uncertainty about reaching the final expression and seeks clarification on the notation and derivation process. Overall, the thread highlights the complexities of working with complex vectors in physics and the need for clear definitions in mathematical expressions.
happyparticle
Messages
490
Reaction score
24
Summary:: summation of the components of a complex vector

Hi,

In my textbook I have
##\widetilde{\vec{E_t}} = (\widetilde{\vec{E_i}} \cdot \hat{e_p}) \hat{e_p}##

##\widetilde{\vec{E_t}} = \sum_j( (\widetilde{\vec{E_{ij}}} \cdot {e_{p_j}}*) \hat{e_p}##

For ##\hat{e_p} = \hat{x}##
##\widetilde{\vec{E_{0i}}} = (E_{0x} \hat{x} \pm E_{0y} \hat{y} )e^{i\theta}##

Thus, ##\widetilde{\vec{E_0t}} = (\sum E_{0ij} e_{pj}*) \hat{e_p}##

and then
##\widetilde{\vec{E_0t}} = E_0 cos \theta \hat{x} + E_0 sin^* \theta (0) ##

I don't see how to get the last line. This is what I think.

##\widetilde{\vec{E_0t}} = [(E_{0x}e^{i \theta}] \hat{x}## where, ##e_{p}* = x - iy = 1## because ##\hat{e_p} = \hat{x}##

= ## E_{0x} (cos \theta + i sin \theta) \hat{x}##

I tried different way to get the same result, but I'm not sure to fully understand.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
EpselonZero said:
Summary:: summation of the components of a complex vector

Hi,

In my textbook I have
##\widetilde{\vec{E_t}} = (\widetilde{\vec{E_i}} \cdot \hat{e_p}) \hat{e_p}##

##\widetilde{\vec{E_t}} = \sum_j( (\widetilde{\vec{E_{ij}}} \cdot {e_{p_j}}*) \hat{e_p}##

For ##\hat{e_p} = \hat{x}##
##\widetilde{\vec{E_{0i}}} = (E_{0x} \hat{x} \pm E_{0y} \hat{y} )e^{i\theta}##

Thus, ##\widetilde{\vec{E_0t}} = (\sum E_{0ij} e_{pj}*) \hat{e_p}##

and then
##\widetilde{\vec{E_0t}} = E_0 cos \theta \hat{x} + E_0 sin^* \theta (0) ##

I don't see how to get the last line. This is what I think.

##\widetilde{\vec{E_0t}} = [(E_{0x}e^{i \theta}] \hat{x}## where, ##e_{p}* = x - iy = 1## because ##\hat{e_p} = \hat{x}##

= ## E_{0x} (cos \theta + i sin \theta) \hat{x}##

I tried different way to get the same result, but I'm not sure to fully understand.
Shouldn't ep* be a vector?
You write ep* = x -iy. That's a scalar.
 
Too many undefined notational symbols to guess at, which textbook are you using?
 
Thread 'Inducing EMF Through a Coil: Understanding Flux'
Thank you for reading my post. I can understand why a change in magnetic flux through a conducting surface would induce an emf, but how does this work when inducing an emf through a coil? How does the flux through the empty space between the wires have an effect on the electrons in the wire itself? In the image below is a coil with a magnetic field going through the space between the wires but not necessarily through the wires themselves. Thank you.
I was using the Smith chart to determine the input impedance of a transmission line that has a reflection from the load. One can do this if one knows the characteristic impedance Zo, the degree of mismatch of the load ZL and the length of the transmission line in wavelengths. However, my question is: Consider the input impedance of a wave which appears back at the source after reflection from the load and has traveled for some fraction of a wavelength. The impedance of this wave as it...
Back
Top