Trivial question about units (Hans Bethe Small Hole Diffraction)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the differences in units between CGS and SI systems as referenced in Hans Bethe's 1944 paper on diffraction. The user notes that Jackson does not dispute Bethe's findings, suggesting the equivalence of the two dipole sets. The key distinction highlighted is the factor of ##4\pi\epsilon_0##, which is crucial for understanding the conversion between these unit systems. The user seeks clarification on this "old school" convention, indicating a need for deeper insight into the implications of these unit differences.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of CGS and SI unit systems
  • Familiarity with electromagnetic theory
  • Knowledge of dipole interactions
  • Basic grasp of diffraction principles
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of using CGS vs SI in electromagnetic calculations
  • Study the role of ##\epsilon_0## in electrostatics
  • Explore the historical context of unit conventions in physics
  • Examine practical examples of unit conversion in diffraction experiments
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of electromagnetism, and researchers involved in diffraction studies will benefit from this discussion, particularly those looking to clarify unit conventions in theoretical and experimental contexts.

PhDeezNutz
Messages
851
Reaction score
561
Homework Statement
Just a question about units/convention. In Hans Bethe's paper he says the equivalent electric and magnetic dipoles of a small circular aperture are

##\vec{p} = \frac{1}{3 \pi} a^3 \vec{E}_0##
##\vec{m} = \frac{2}{3 \pi} a^3 \vec{H}_0##

Alternatively Jackson (Section 9.5 Third Edition) (where he references Hans Bethe's paper) contends the equivalent aperture dipoles are

##\vec{p} = \frac{4 \epsilon_0 a^3}{3} \vec{E}_0##
##\vec{m} = \frac{8 a^3}{3} \vec{H}_0##
Relevant Equations
See above
http://www.physics.miami.edu/~curtright/Diffraction/Bethe1944.pdf Hans Bethe's paper

Jackson doesn't take any issue with Hans Bethe's paper as far as I can tell when he references it. That leads me to believe the two sets of dipoles are equivalent and there happens to be an "old school" convention that I am not familiar with. Can anyone inform me?

Thanks in advanced.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think it is CGS vs SI and the difference is basically ##4\pi\epsilon_0##. You can work out the details it always gets me a headache.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PhDeezNutz

Similar threads

Replies
39
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
17K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K