2
$\begingroup$

The usual process for deriving the boundary condition for the tangential electric field across a surface uses Faraday's Law to prove that (when there are no dipole layers etc.) $$\hat{\textbf{t}} \cdot(\textbf{E}_1 - \textbf{E}_2) = 0 \tag{A}$$ where $\hat{\textbf{t}}$ is any vector in the tangent plane at the given point on the surface, and where 1 and 2 denote the two sides of the given surface. I have denoted this statement by $A$. If this is true, then

$$\hat{\textbf{n}} \times (\textbf{E}_1 - \textbf{E}_2) = 0 \tag{B}$$

follows immediately, for otherwise $\textbf{E}_1 - \textbf{E}_2$ is not completely along $\hat{\textbf{n}}$ (which is to say there is a component of $\textbf{E}_1 - \textbf{E}_2$ which is tangent to the plane, contradicting $A$).

Indeed, it is always written that $$A \iff B$$ and yet I cannot prove the converse, $B \implies A$. I'm hoping someone can supply that converse in full generality, without taking a particularly convenient surface etc.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

$$\hat{\textbf{t}} \cdot(\textbf{E}_1 - \textbf{E}_2) = 0 \tag{A}$$ where $\hat{\textbf{t}}$ is any vector in the tangent plane at the given point on the surface, and where 1 and 2 denote the two sides of the given surface. I have denoted this statement by $A$. If this is true, then $$\hat{\textbf{n}} \times (\textbf{E}_1 - \textbf{E}_2) = 0 \tag{B}$$ follows immediately, for otherwise $\textbf{E}_1 - \textbf{E}_2$ is not completely along $\hat{\textbf{n}}$ (which is to say there is a component of $\textbf{E}_1 - \textbf{E}_2$ which is tangent to the plane, contradicting $A$).

Indeed, it is always written that $$A \iff B$$ and yet I cannot prove the converse, $B \implies A$.

Let $\vec v = \vec E_1 - \vec E_2$.

Your Eq (B) means that the angle between $\hat n$ and $\vec v$ is either zero degrees or 180 degrees. This means that $\vec v$ is either parallel to or anti-parallel to $\hat n$.

$$ \vec v = \pm |v|\hat n $$

Because, by definition, $\hat n$ is perpendicular to any $\hat t$, so too is $-\hat n$, and so too is $\vec v$.

$$ \vec v \cdot \hat t = \pm |v| \hat n \cdot \hat t = 0 $$

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Very simple, I'm mortified I missed this. Thanks! $\endgroup$
    – EE18
    Commented Oct 19, 2022 at 17:44

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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