Using Wave Equation to Prove that EM Waves are Light

In summary, the conversation discusses the attempt to use the wave equation to prove that electromagnetic waves are light. The equations used include E = Em sin(kx-wt), B = Bm sin(kx-wt), ∂E/∂x = -∂B/∂t, -∂B/∂x = μ0ε0 ∂E/∂t, and the wave equation: ∂2y/∂x2 = 1/v^2(∂2y/∂t2). The attempt at a solution involved differentiating the equations with respect to x and t and substituting them into the wave equation, resulting in w^2 = (k^2)/(
  • #1
izchief360
7
0

Homework Statement


I'm working on using the wave equation to prove that EM waves are light.


Homework Equations


Here's what I'm working with:

E = Em sin(kx-wt)
B = Bm sin(kx-wt)

∂E/∂x = -∂B/∂t
-∂B/∂x = μ0ε0 ∂E/∂t

and the wave equation: ∂2y/∂x2 = 1/v^2(∂2y/∂t2)


The Attempt at a Solution



I've differentiated the two equations with respect to x and t (after substituting in the equations for E and B) to get something resembling the wave equation, where y=E and y=B.

∂2E/∂x2 = 1/v^2(∂2E/∂t2) --> (w^2)Bm sin(kx-wt) = (1/v^2)(k^2)Bm sin(kx-wt) (1/μ0ε0)

which simplifies to: w^2 = (k^2)/(v^2)(1/μ0ε0)

Now I'm stuck, because I can't figure out a way to prove this last relation.
 

Attachments

  • physics.jpg
    physics.jpg
    32.8 KB · Views: 531
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
∂2E/∂x2 = 1/v^2(∂2E/∂t2) --> (w^2)Bm sin(kx-wt) = (1/v^2)(k^2)Bm sin(kx-wt) (1/μ0ε0)

which simplifies to: w^2 = (k^2)/(v^2)(1/μ0ε0)
Here - let me help, you just wrote:$$\frac{\partial^2E}{\partial x^2} = \frac{1}{v^2}\frac{\partial^2E}{\partial t^2} \implies \omega^2 B_m\sin(kx-\omega t) = \frac{1}{v^2}k^2 B_m\sin(kx-\omega t)\frac{1}{\mu_0\epsilon_0}$$ ... which simplifies to: $$\omega^2 = \frac{k^2}{v^2}\frac{1}{\mu_0\epsilon_0} $$ ... is this correct?
I'm guessing you wanted that first equation to be a "B" equation?
It is unclear were the permitivity and permiability came from in the RHS of the second equation.
I suspect you have got a bit mixed up between the different equations.

Now I'm stuck, because I can't figure out a way to prove this last relation.
Note: if you have a stationary periodic function ##y(x)=\sin kx##, then the same function as a wave moving in the ##+x## direction with speed ##v## is ##y(x-vt) = \sin k(x-vt) = sin(kx-\omega t)## so ##\omega=kv## ... does that help?

Also: $$c^2=\frac{1}{\mu_0\epsilon_0}$$

It is not clear how you expect to "prove" that EM waves are light by this approach.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Thanks for the help!

So, if w = kv, then (w^2) = (k^2)(v^2) and:


w^2 = (k^2)/(v^2)(1/μ0ε0) simplifies to (v^2) = (1/v^2)(c^2) which goes to (v^4) = (c^2)

...now?
 
  • #4
izchief360 said:
Thanks for the help!

So, if w = kv, then (w^2) = (k^2)(v^2) and:w^2 = (k^2)/(v^2)(1/μ0ε0) simplifies to (v^2) = (1/v^2)(c^2) which goes to (v^4) = (c^2)

...now?
Where did the (1/μ0ε0) go?
Edit: Ah, you used Simon Bridge's equation. Looks like there is an error in the derivation of your equation, not sure where.

I'm working on using the wave equation to prove that EM waves are light.
This is impossible. You can show that electromagnetic waves travel at the same speed of light, you can show their energy/momentum relation agrees with light and so on - but that does not prove light is an electromagnetic wave, it could be a wave of something different.
 
  • #5
I've looked over my derivation (attached in original post) and can't seem to find any errors.
 
  • #6
You seem to have got mixed up between the different equations.
Go back through the derivation one step at a time, and document your reasoning.
Note: you cannot use this approach to prove that EM waves are light.

You are starting from:$$\frac{\partial}{\partial x}E= -\frac{\partial}{\partial t}B\\ \frac{\partial}{\partial x}B= -\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}E$$
Differentiating the first equation wrt x, and the second equation wrt t, gets you:$$\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2}E= -\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}B\\
\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}B= -\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2}E$$
IF$$\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}B=\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}B$$

THEN... you should be able to take it from there.
 

Related to Using Wave Equation to Prove that EM Waves are Light

1. What is the wave equation and how does it relate to light?

The wave equation is a mathematical formula that describes the behavior of waves, including electromagnetic (EM) waves. It relates the properties of a wave, such as its frequency and wavelength, to its speed and direction of propagation.

2. How does the wave equation prove that EM waves are light?

The wave equation, when applied to electromagnetic waves, shows that they have all the properties of light, such as the ability to travel through a vacuum, the ability to be reflected and refracted, and the ability to interfere with each other. This provides strong evidence that EM waves are indeed a form of light.

3. Can the wave equation be used to measure the speed of light?

Yes, the wave equation can be used to calculate the speed of light. By plugging in the known values for the frequency and wavelength of an EM wave, we can solve for its speed, which is equal to the speed of light.

4. How does the wave equation support the wave-particle duality of light?

The wave equation, along with other experiments and observations, supports the idea that light has both wave-like and particle-like properties. The wave equation shows that EM waves can be described as a series of oscillating electric and magnetic fields, but they also exhibit behaviors that can only be explained by treating them as particles (photons).

5. Are there any limitations to using the wave equation to prove that EM waves are light?

While the wave equation is a powerful tool for understanding and predicting the behavior of light, it is not the only evidence we have for EM waves being light. Other experiments, such as the photoelectric effect, also provide strong evidence for the wave-particle duality of light. Additionally, the wave equation does not explain all of the properties of light, such as its polarization. Therefore, it should be used in conjunction with other evidence when proving that EM waves are light.

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
883
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
953
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
636
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
988
Back
Top