2
$\begingroup$

Consider the simple case of electromagnetic irradiation of a homogeneous isotropic dielectric, neglecting the dispersion of the refractive index. Assuming a transparent medium, the spatial density of forces acting on the dielectric in a static external electromagnetic field can be given as

$$\mathbf{f} = - \nabla p - \nabla \epsilon \dfrac{\langle \mathbf{E}^2 \rangle}{8 \pi} - \nabla \mu \dfrac{\langle \mathbf{H}^2 \rangle}{8 \pi} + \nabla \left[ \left( \rho \dfrac{\partial{\epsilon}}{\partial{\rho}} \right)_T \dfrac{\langle \mathbf{E}^2 \rangle}{8 \pi} + \left( \rho \dfrac{\partial{\mu}}{\partial{\rho}} \right)_T \dfrac{\langle \mathbf{H}^2 \rangle}{8 \pi} \right] + \dfrac{\epsilon \mu - 1}{4 \pi c} \dfrac{\partial}{\partial{t}}\langle [ \mathbf{E} \times \mathbf{H}] \rangle.$$

$p$ is the pressure in the medium (for a given density $\rho$ and temperature $T$ in zero field.
$\epsilon$ and $\mu$ are the permittivity and magnetic permeability.
$c$ is the speed of light.
The angular brackets denote averaging over a time period far greater than the characteristic alternation period of light.

It is said that, by expressing $\langle E^2 \rangle$ through $I$ (the light intensity) and introducing the refractive index $n = \sqrt{\epsilon}$, we can transform the striction force equation to

$$\mathbf{f}_{\text{str}} = \nabla \left[ \left( \rho \dfrac{\partial{\epsilon}}{\partial{\rho}} \right)_T \dfrac{\langle \mathbf{E}^2 \rangle}{8 \pi} \right] = \nabla \left[ \left( \rho \dfrac{\partial{n}}{\partial{\rho}} \right)_T \dfrac{I}{c} \right].$$

I'm trying to understand how exactly we get $\nabla \left[ \left( \rho \dfrac{\partial{\epsilon}}{\partial{\rho}} \right)_T \dfrac{\langle \mathbf{E}^2 \rangle}{8 \pi} \right] = \nabla \left[ \left( \rho \dfrac{\partial{n}}{\partial{\rho}} \right)_T \dfrac{I}{c} \right]$. I've been doing a lot of research to try and understand this, but I'm stuck.

My best attempt is as follows. As said here, in optics, the time-averaged value of the radiated flux is technically known as the irradiance, more often simply referred to as the intensity. The Wikipedia article for intensity says that, if $I$ is the local intensity (I'm not completely sure if this is the correct assumption for our case), then we have that $I = \dfrac{cn \epsilon_0}{2}|E|^2$, where $\epsilon_0$ is the vacuum permittivity. And so, if we assume that $\langle \mathbf{E}^2 \rangle = |E|^2$ (which seems to be true, given the answer here), then we get that $|E|^2 = \dfrac{2I}{cn \epsilon_0}$, and so $\nabla \left[ \left( \rho \dfrac{\partial{\epsilon}}{\partial{\rho}} \right)_T \dfrac{\langle \mathbf{E}^2 \rangle}{8 \pi} \right] = \nabla \left[ \left( \rho \dfrac{\partial{n^2}}{\partial{\rho}} \right)_T \dfrac{I}{4 \pi c n \epsilon_0} \right]$. But it is not clear how one proceeds from here.

Some other potentially relevant facts that I found during my research are as follows:

  • According to the article on irradiance (different from the article on intensity), $E_{{\mathrm {e}}}={\frac {n}{2\mu _{0}{\mathrm {c}}}}E_{{\mathrm {m}}}^{2}\cos \alpha ={\frac {n\varepsilon _{0}{\mathrm {c}}}{2}}E_{{\mathrm {m}}}^{2}\cos \alpha$. If we let that $\cos(\alpha) = 1$ for our case, then this might be relevant.
  • The article on vacuum permittivity states that $\varepsilon _{0}={\frac {1}{\mu _{0}c^{2}}}$, where $\mu_0$ is the vacuum permeability.
  • This page on "energy density, flux and power" has numerous relevant-looking facts that include $E$ and time-averaged values, and look like they could potentially cancel the necessary factors, such as $4\pi$ or $8\pi$, somehow.

I would greatly appreciate it if people would please take the time to explain exactly how we get from $\nabla \left[ \left( \rho \dfrac{\partial{\epsilon}}{\partial{\rho}} \right)_T \dfrac{\langle \mathbf{E}^2 \rangle}{8 \pi} \right]$ to $\nabla \left[ \left( \rho \dfrac{\partial{n}}{\partial{\rho}} \right)_T \dfrac{I}{c} \right]$.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The formula you are trying to prove is written in gaussian units (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_units), and equations that contain $\epsilon_0$ and $\mu_0$ are written in SI units. $\endgroup$ – atarasenko Aug 4 '20 at 0:37
  • $\begingroup$ @atarasenko Oh wow, I think you're right. Thank you for that. Looking through that Wikipedia article, I think I was on the right track with $\nabla \left[ \left( \rho \dfrac{\partial{\epsilon}}{\partial{\rho}} \right)_T \dfrac{\langle \mathbf{E}^2 \rangle}{8 \pi} \right] = \nabla \left[ \left( \rho \dfrac{\partial{n^2}}{\partial{\rho}} \right)_T \dfrac{I}{4 \pi c n \epsilon_0} \right]$! But which formula in particular should I be using? The closest that I can see might be $\mu _{0}\varepsilon _{0} = 1/c^{2}$, but this still doesn't get us what we need. Do you know enough to post an answer? $\endgroup$ – The Pointer Aug 4 '20 at 0:57
0
+50
$\begingroup$

Using the conversion formula from SI to gaussian units $E^{G}=\sqrt{4\pi\epsilon_0}E^{SI}$ (see Table 1 in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_units), the formula for intensity is transformed to: $$ I=\frac{cn\epsilon_0|E^{SI}|^2}{2}\rightarrow I=\frac{cn|E^{G}|^2}{8\pi} $$ For a monochromatic linearly polarized wave with amplitude $E_0$, $\left<\mathbf{E}^2\right>=E_0^2/2$, and $$ I=\frac{cn\left<\mathbf{E}^2\right>}{4\pi} $$ $$ \rho\left(\frac{\partial\epsilon}{\partial\rho}\right)_T\frac{\left<\mathbf{E}^2\right>}{8\pi}=\rho\cdot 2n\left(\frac{\partial n}{\partial\rho}\right)_T\cdot\frac{4\pi I}{8\pi cn}=\rho\left(\frac{\partial n}{\partial\rho}\right)_T\frac{I}{c} $$

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks a lot for taking the time to post this! $\endgroup$ – The Pointer Aug 4 '20 at 3:41

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.