Is the Given Function a Valid Electromagnetic Plane Wave?

  • Thread starter Thread starter HPRF
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Condition Wave
AI Thread Summary
The expression B=kBzei(kzz-wt) is examined to determine if it qualifies as a valid electromagnetic plane wave by applying the divergence condition, divB=0. The calculated divergence yields divB=ikzBzei(kzz-wt), which is not zero, indicating that the function does not satisfy the necessary condition for a valid magnetic field. The discussion emphasizes that the actual magnetic field is derived from the real part of the complex representation, denoted as \tilde{\textbf{B}}. Therefore, for B to be valid, the divergence of its real part must also vanish, raising concerns about the polarization direction relative to propagation. Ultimately, the expression does not meet the criteria for a valid electromagnetic plane wave.
HPRF
Messages
31
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



By considering divergence, show whether the expression

B=kBzei(kzz-wt)

is a valid function for an electromagnetic plane wave.

Homework Equations



divB=0

The Attempt at a Solution



I have found divB=ikzBzei(kzz-wt).

Does this satisfy divB=0 because it is imaginary?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The field you give is usually denoted as

\tilde{\textbf{B}}=\hat{\mathbf{k}}\tilde{B}_ze^{i(k_z z- \omega t)}

and is itself complex-valued... The actual magnetic field \textbf{B} is taken to be the real part of \tilde{\textbf{B}}[/itex] and so<br /> <br /> \mathbf{\nabla}\cdot\textbf{B}=\mathbf{\nabla}\cdot\text{Re}\left[\tilde{\textbf{B}}\right]=0<br /> <br /> So, only if the divergence <i>of the real part</i> of the field you gave vanishes, can it be a valid magnetic field (The fact that the magnetic field is polarized in the same direction as the propagation should give you a little bit of hesitation here).
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...

Similar threads

Back
Top