0
$\begingroup$

I have asked this question a number of times and am still uneasy with it.

enter image description here

I want to know how somebody can derive the equation (also see above, picture from a publication):

$$\epsilon(\omega)=\epsilon_L + \frac{i\sigma(\omega)}{\omega}$$

The sign is completely wrong in my mind! I am aware that physicists and engineers use different harmonic time dependencies. Such that a time derivative could be either $-i\omega$ or $i\omega$. However, this time dependency should only change the sign of $\epsilon_L$, not the second term.

My derivation is as follows, starting with Maxwell's 4th:

$$\nabla \times H = J + \frac{\partial D}{\partial t}$$ For engineers: $$=\sigma E + i\omega \epsilon_0\epsilon_rE$$ For physicists (notice sign change reflecting difference in harmonic time dependence): $$=\sigma E - i\omega \epsilon_0\epsilon_rE$$

Also, $$\nabla \times H =j\omega \epsilon_0\epsilon^* E$$

Equate both sides and you're left with either

$$\epsilon^*(\omega)=-\epsilon_L + \frac{\sigma(\omega)}{i\omega\epsilon_0}$$ $$\epsilon^*(\omega)=\epsilon_L + \frac{\sigma(\omega)}{i\omega\epsilon_0}$$

I realise there is a possibility I'm misunderstanding the second form of Maxwell's 4th I've used? Even if this would also reflect harmonic time dependence and would therefore be $\nabla \times H =-j\omega \epsilon_0\epsilon^* E$, the derivation still could work out. Deriving it this way, there are four possibilities:

  1. $ - \epsilon_L + \frac{\sigma(\omega)}{i\omega\epsilon_0}$ (wrong, mismatched harmonic time dependencies)
  2. $ \epsilon_L + \frac{\sigma(\omega)}{-i\omega\epsilon_0}$ (correct if you're a phyisicist)
  3. $ - \epsilon_L + \frac{\sigma(\omega)}{-i\omega\epsilon_0}$ (wrong, mismatched harmonic time dependencies)
  4. $ \epsilon_L + \frac{\sigma(\omega)}{i\omega\epsilon_0}$ (correct if you're an engineer)

Really, my question is where does $\nabla \times H =-j\omega \epsilon_0\epsilon^* E$ come from, and does it also exhibit harmonic time dependence? This was answered below, very nicely!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ You may want to check this derivation in Born and Wolf Principles of Optics (Chap 13. p. 612-613: archive.org/details/PrinciplesOfOptics/page/n659/mode/2up ) where they derive results in the optics of metals. It seems to be close to what you are looking for. I hope this helps. $\endgroup$ – ad2004 Nov 2 '20 at 19:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ $e^{j\omega t}$ is the engineering convention. $\endgroup$ – Puk Nov 2 '20 at 20:05
  • $\begingroup$ @Puk noted, thank you :) $\endgroup$ – smollma Nov 2 '20 at 21:09
2
$\begingroup$

If we move to Fourier space, we have

$$\mathbf H(\mathbf r,t) = \int_{-\infty}^\infty \hat{\mathbf H}(\mathbf r,\omega) e^{-i\omega t} d\omega$$

$$\mathbf E(\mathbf r,t) = \int_{-\infty}^\infty \hat{\mathbf E}(\mathbf r,\omega) e^{-i\omega t} d\omega$$

$$\mathbf D(\mathbf r,t)= \int_{-\infty}^\infty \epsilon(\omega)\hat{\mathbf E}(\mathbf r,\omega) e^{-i\omega t} d\omega$$

$$\mathbf J(\mathbf r,t) = \int_{-\infty}^\infty \sigma(\omega) \hat{\mathbf E}(\mathbf r,\omega) e^{-i\omega t} d\omega$$

in which case Ampere's law becomes $$\nabla \times \hat{\mathbf H}(\mathbf r,\omega)= \sigma(\omega)\hat{\mathbf E}(\mathbf r,\omega) -i\omega \epsilon(\omega)\hat{\mathbf E}(\mathbf r,\omega)$$ $$=-i\omega\epsilon_0\left[\epsilon_r(\omega) + \frac{i\sigma(\omega)}{\epsilon_0 \omega}\right]\hat{\mathbf E}(\mathbf r,\omega) \equiv -i\omega\epsilon_0 \tilde{\epsilon}_r(\omega)\hat{\mathbf E}(\mathbf r,\omega)$$

This is consistent with $\nabla \times \mathbf H = \frac{\partial}{\partial t} \mathbf D$, where $\epsilon(\omega)$ has acquired an imaginary part. The minus sign on the right hand side reflects the fact that $\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\rightarrow -i\omega$ in this convention.


If you replace all of the $e^{-i\omega t}$'s with $e^{+i\omega t}$'s in the definitions of the Fourier-space quantities, then Ampere's law would become

$$\nabla \times \hat{\mathbf H}(\mathbf r,\omega) = \sigma(\omega)\hat{\mathbf E}(\mathbf r,\omega) +i\omega\epsilon(\omega)\hat{\mathbf E}(\mathbf r,\omega)$$ $$=i\omega\epsilon_0\left[\epsilon_r(\omega) -\frac{i\sigma(\omega)}{\epsilon_0\omega}\right]\hat{\mathbf E}(\mathbf r,\omega) \equiv i\omega \epsilon_0\tilde{\epsilon}_r(\omega) \hat{\mathbf E}(\mathbf r,\omega)$$

This too is consistent with $\nabla\times\mathbf H = \frac{\partial}{\partial t}\mathbf D$, where the lack of a minus sign on the right-hand side reflects that in this choice of convention, $\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\rightarrow i\omega$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Really helpful response, thank you! $\endgroup$ – smollma Nov 2 '20 at 21:08

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.