Why is the Poynting Vector defined as E x B?

AI Thread Summary
The Poynting Vector, defined as S = 1/u(E x B), indicates the direction of electromagnetic wave propagation, with the electric field (E) and magnetic field (B) components oriented perpendicularly. The discussion centers on the relationship between E and B, questioning whether the orientation of these fields is experimentally determined or a mathematical necessity. It highlights that Maxwell's equations impose constraints on electromagnetic waves, such as the requirement for certain components to equal zero in a vacuum. The mathematical relationships derived from these equations, including the wave equation, support the established orientation of E and B fields. Understanding this relationship is crucial for comprehending electromagnetic wave behavior.
Usaf Moji
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
Poynting Vector is by definition:

S = 1/u(E x B), where S points in the direction of the EM wave's motion.

In other words, for an EM wave moving from left to right, the electric field component always points up as the magnetic field component hits us in the face, and conversely, the electric field component always points down as the magnetic field components moves away from us into the page.

My question is, how was this constant relative position of the B field to the E field determined, i.e. was it experimentally determined, or is it a necessary mathematical consequence of other formulae? In other words, why is it E x B instead of B x E? Is this just the way EM fields are measured to be, or is their some logical/mathematical reason for it?

All responses appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We know from Maxwell's equations in vacuum that the Laplacian(E) = UoEo*(d^2E/dt^2) and similarly for Laplacian(B) = UoEod^2B/dt.

These satisfy the wave equation. However, Maxwell's equations add constraints to the waves.

For instance, a wave traveling in the z driection Ez and Bz must equal zero to satisfy div(E) = div(B) = 0. (Waves are in a vacuum so div(E) = 0).

Also del X E also tells us that Bo = k/w(z X Eo) which is the relation you were discussing.
 
Oh and sorry about the messy notation, I don't know LaTex.
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top