What is the intuitution behind a wave with zero wavenumber?

Physics Asked by levente.nas on December 1, 2020

I was recently solving a physics problem that gave you the electric field $$E(x, y, z, t) = E_{0}cos(k_{y}y + psi_{y})sin(k_{x}x-{omega}t)hat{z}$$ and the question asked for a variety of things including $k_{y}$, the dispersion relation, and the lowest frequency that will propagate. With the boundary conditions E = 0 at y = 0 and y = b, you can find $k_{y}$ to be $npi/a$ where n is a number greater than 0. With those boundary conditions, you can also find $psi_{y}$ to be $pi/2$. With some trig, you can simplify the electric field to $$E(x, y, z, t) = E_{0}sin((npi/a)y)sin(k_{x}x-{omega}t)hat{z}$$ To find the dispersion relation, you can plug this electric field into the wave equation. The result ends up being $k_{x} = sqrt{(omega^2/c^2) – (npi/a)^2}$. After this, I got stuck. The answer key says the lowest frequency that will propagate happens at n = 1 (why at n = 1?), and with this they find $omega_{cutoff}$ to be ${pi}c/a$. If this is the case, doesn’t $k_{x}$ have to be zero? If that is the case, what does a zero wavenumber mean intuitively?

One Answer

In general, $n=0,1,2,...$. But if $n=0$, the field is zero, because the field is proportional to $sin(npi y/a)$. So the smallest value of $n$ for which the field can propagate is $n=1$.

In general, $k_x=0$ just means that the field is constant in the $x$ direction. A way think about this is that $k_x=2pi/lambda_x$, where $lambda_x$ is the wavelength in the $x$ direction. The limit of 0 wavenumber $k_xrightarrow 0$ corresponds to the limit of infinite wavelength $lambda_x rightarrow infty$. You can think of a constant as a wave with an infinite wavelength. Similarly, $|vec{k}|=0$ means that the field is a constant over all space.

I'm not quite sure why you have written the part of the field varying in the $x$ direction as $sin(k_x x - omega t)$, as opposed to $sin(k_x x-omega t +phi_0)$, for some initial phase $phi_0$. If this is allowed by the boundary conditions, then for $k_x=0$, we would have $omega=npi/a$, so the field would be vary in time but be constant in the $x$ direction, explicitly given by by $sin(- n pi/a + phi_0)$. For $phi_0=0$ (which is the expression you started with), the field would be identically zero.

Correct answer by Andrew on December 1, 2020

Add your own answers!

Related Questions

Shack Hartmann lenslet array design

1  Asked on September 28, 2021 by helawae


Ask a Question

Get help from others!

© 2022 All rights reserved. Sites we Love: PCI Database, MenuIva, UKBizDB, Menu Kuliner, Sharing RPP, SolveDir