Are wave equations equivalent to Maxwell's equations in free space?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP












10












$begingroup$


In free space, do Maxwell's equations contain the same amount of information regarding electric and magnetic fields as is contained in the wave equations derived from them? If so, how?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 2




    $begingroup$
    One way to prove the non-equivalence is by constructing a set of equations which is different from Maxwell's, but for which the $bf E$ and $bf B$ fields satisfy a wave-equation. For example we can consider the toy-theory of electromagnetism that is, in the absence of charges, described by the two equations $dotbf E = kbf B,~dotbf B = fracc^2knabla^2bf E,$ where $k$ is a free constant. Not hard to show that this implies wave equations and the theory is obviously different from Maxwells.
    $endgroup$
    – Winther
    Mar 7 at 20:19















10












$begingroup$


In free space, do Maxwell's equations contain the same amount of information regarding electric and magnetic fields as is contained in the wave equations derived from them? If so, how?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 2




    $begingroup$
    One way to prove the non-equivalence is by constructing a set of equations which is different from Maxwell's, but for which the $bf E$ and $bf B$ fields satisfy a wave-equation. For example we can consider the toy-theory of electromagnetism that is, in the absence of charges, described by the two equations $dotbf E = kbf B,~dotbf B = fracc^2knabla^2bf E,$ where $k$ is a free constant. Not hard to show that this implies wave equations and the theory is obviously different from Maxwells.
    $endgroup$
    – Winther
    Mar 7 at 20:19













10












10








10


3



$begingroup$


In free space, do Maxwell's equations contain the same amount of information regarding electric and magnetic fields as is contained in the wave equations derived from them? If so, how?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




In free space, do Maxwell's equations contain the same amount of information regarding electric and magnetic fields as is contained in the wave equations derived from them? If so, how?







electromagnetism waves maxwell-equations vacuum






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Mar 8 at 9:54









Nat

3,67341932




3,67341932










asked Mar 7 at 9:11









Jeevesh JunejaJeevesh Juneja

766




766







  • 2




    $begingroup$
    One way to prove the non-equivalence is by constructing a set of equations which is different from Maxwell's, but for which the $bf E$ and $bf B$ fields satisfy a wave-equation. For example we can consider the toy-theory of electromagnetism that is, in the absence of charges, described by the two equations $dotbf E = kbf B,~dotbf B = fracc^2knabla^2bf E,$ where $k$ is a free constant. Not hard to show that this implies wave equations and the theory is obviously different from Maxwells.
    $endgroup$
    – Winther
    Mar 7 at 20:19












  • 2




    $begingroup$
    One way to prove the non-equivalence is by constructing a set of equations which is different from Maxwell's, but for which the $bf E$ and $bf B$ fields satisfy a wave-equation. For example we can consider the toy-theory of electromagnetism that is, in the absence of charges, described by the two equations $dotbf E = kbf B,~dotbf B = fracc^2knabla^2bf E,$ where $k$ is a free constant. Not hard to show that this implies wave equations and the theory is obviously different from Maxwells.
    $endgroup$
    – Winther
    Mar 7 at 20:19







2




2




$begingroup$
One way to prove the non-equivalence is by constructing a set of equations which is different from Maxwell's, but for which the $bf E$ and $bf B$ fields satisfy a wave-equation. For example we can consider the toy-theory of electromagnetism that is, in the absence of charges, described by the two equations $dotbf E = kbf B,~dotbf B = fracc^2knabla^2bf E,$ where $k$ is a free constant. Not hard to show that this implies wave equations and the theory is obviously different from Maxwells.
$endgroup$
– Winther
Mar 7 at 20:19




$begingroup$
One way to prove the non-equivalence is by constructing a set of equations which is different from Maxwell's, but for which the $bf E$ and $bf B$ fields satisfy a wave-equation. For example we can consider the toy-theory of electromagnetism that is, in the absence of charges, described by the two equations $dotbf E = kbf B,~dotbf B = fracc^2knabla^2bf E,$ where $k$ is a free constant. Not hard to show that this implies wave equations and the theory is obviously different from Maxwells.
$endgroup$
– Winther
Mar 7 at 20:19










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















15












$begingroup$

No, they're not. The wave equations for the force fields contain a strict subset of the information contained in the full set of Maxwell's equations. In particular, it's important to note that you need the Gauss-type equations,
$$
nablacdot mathbf E = 0 = nablacdotmathbf B,
$$

to ensure the transversality of the waves. If all you had to go was the wave equations in the form
$$
left[partial_t^2 - c^2 nabla^2 right]mathbf E = 0
$$

then you'd have no way of knowing that longitudinal EM waves are forbidden. (Though, to be clear, the transversality conditions are not sufficient, either.)






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$




















    14












    $begingroup$

    The wave equations for electromagnetic waves in free space can be derived from Maxwell's equations. However, Maxwell's equations can be used to describe much more. For example, you can derive from them, how an electromagnetic wave is launched from an antenna. Or you can treat electrostatic and magnetostatic phenomena. You can learn from them how electric motors work, and how we can convert mechanical into electric energy in generators. There is a huge wealth of physics in these four equations, which has enormous importance for most of the phenomena we observe around us, and for much of today's modern technology.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      I am talking of maxwell's equations in free space. No antennas or motors etc. I am asking when we write maxwell's equations in free space and then from those equations derive the wave equation , is any information lost in the derivation??
      $endgroup$
      – Kavita Juneja
      Mar 7 at 14:45











    • $begingroup$
      You should really explain why the two are non-equivalent, though (the reason being, not all solutions to wave equations are physical solutions for electric and magnetic field); this said, if you accidentally picked those wave solutions that do represent the physical fields, then all you have described is automatically incorporated.
      $endgroup$
      – gented
      Mar 7 at 16:52


















    2












    $begingroup$

    Remaining to the case of Maxwell's equations (ME) in vacuum, there is no equivalence between the wave equations for the fields and the original set. As already pointed out, solutions of ME are a subset of the solutions of the two three-dimensional wave equations.



    The case made by Emilio Pisanty (one loses information about the transversality) has to be taken as just one example of the non-equivalence. Another information which gets lost is the phase relation between magnetic and electric field.



    From a mathematical point of view it is not difficult to understand the reason of the non-equivalence: in order to derive the wave equations one has to



    1. take the curl of one of the equations containing the time derivative of a field;

    2. use the other equation to rewrite the time derivative of a curl as a second time derivative.

    It is clear that the additional derivative implied by step 1 may eliminate some information. It is quite well known that if one takes additional derivatives of a differential equations, the resulting equation usually has more solutions than the original one and one has to choose among them those satisfying the original equation.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      It's not just the phase relation between the two fields - it's the loss of any connection at all between them. You can zero out one of the fields, or replace it with some completely different solution, and the wave equations won't blink an eye.
      $endgroup$
      – Emilio Pisanty
      Mar 8 at 10:16










    • $begingroup$
      Sure. I wrote "another" information. Your point goes directly at the core of the problem: one could have a wave "only magnetic" or "only electric". Although I know some crackpot who thinks this would be possible...
      $endgroup$
      – GiorgioP
      Mar 8 at 17:14


















    1












    $begingroup$

    In the so-called Lorenz gauge Maxwell's equations take the form of a set of inhomogeneous wave equations in terms of the potential. All of the physics is described at least as well by these. Maxwell's equations can be written in covariant notation as $partial_mu F^munu = partial_mu partial^mu A^nu - partial_mu partial^nu A^mu = - j^nu /epsilon_0 $. Choosing the Lorenz gauge, $partial_mu A^mu = 0$ reduces this to the inhomogeneous wave equations, $ partial_mu partial^mu A^nu = - j^nu /epsilon_0 $.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      );
      );
      , "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "151"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f465013%2fare-wave-equations-equivalent-to-maxwells-equations-in-free-space%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      15












      $begingroup$

      No, they're not. The wave equations for the force fields contain a strict subset of the information contained in the full set of Maxwell's equations. In particular, it's important to note that you need the Gauss-type equations,
      $$
      nablacdot mathbf E = 0 = nablacdotmathbf B,
      $$

      to ensure the transversality of the waves. If all you had to go was the wave equations in the form
      $$
      left[partial_t^2 - c^2 nabla^2 right]mathbf E = 0
      $$

      then you'd have no way of knowing that longitudinal EM waves are forbidden. (Though, to be clear, the transversality conditions are not sufficient, either.)






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$

















        15












        $begingroup$

        No, they're not. The wave equations for the force fields contain a strict subset of the information contained in the full set of Maxwell's equations. In particular, it's important to note that you need the Gauss-type equations,
        $$
        nablacdot mathbf E = 0 = nablacdotmathbf B,
        $$

        to ensure the transversality of the waves. If all you had to go was the wave equations in the form
        $$
        left[partial_t^2 - c^2 nabla^2 right]mathbf E = 0
        $$

        then you'd have no way of knowing that longitudinal EM waves are forbidden. (Though, to be clear, the transversality conditions are not sufficient, either.)






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$















          15












          15








          15





          $begingroup$

          No, they're not. The wave equations for the force fields contain a strict subset of the information contained in the full set of Maxwell's equations. In particular, it's important to note that you need the Gauss-type equations,
          $$
          nablacdot mathbf E = 0 = nablacdotmathbf B,
          $$

          to ensure the transversality of the waves. If all you had to go was the wave equations in the form
          $$
          left[partial_t^2 - c^2 nabla^2 right]mathbf E = 0
          $$

          then you'd have no way of knowing that longitudinal EM waves are forbidden. (Though, to be clear, the transversality conditions are not sufficient, either.)






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          No, they're not. The wave equations for the force fields contain a strict subset of the information contained in the full set of Maxwell's equations. In particular, it's important to note that you need the Gauss-type equations,
          $$
          nablacdot mathbf E = 0 = nablacdotmathbf B,
          $$

          to ensure the transversality of the waves. If all you had to go was the wave equations in the form
          $$
          left[partial_t^2 - c^2 nabla^2 right]mathbf E = 0
          $$

          then you'd have no way of knowing that longitudinal EM waves are forbidden. (Though, to be clear, the transversality conditions are not sufficient, either.)







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Mar 7 at 18:09

























          answered Mar 7 at 13:58









          Emilio PisantyEmilio Pisanty

          86.4k23214434




          86.4k23214434





















              14












              $begingroup$

              The wave equations for electromagnetic waves in free space can be derived from Maxwell's equations. However, Maxwell's equations can be used to describe much more. For example, you can derive from them, how an electromagnetic wave is launched from an antenna. Or you can treat electrostatic and magnetostatic phenomena. You can learn from them how electric motors work, and how we can convert mechanical into electric energy in generators. There is a huge wealth of physics in these four equations, which has enormous importance for most of the phenomena we observe around us, and for much of today's modern technology.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$












              • $begingroup$
                I am talking of maxwell's equations in free space. No antennas or motors etc. I am asking when we write maxwell's equations in free space and then from those equations derive the wave equation , is any information lost in the derivation??
                $endgroup$
                – Kavita Juneja
                Mar 7 at 14:45











              • $begingroup$
                You should really explain why the two are non-equivalent, though (the reason being, not all solutions to wave equations are physical solutions for electric and magnetic field); this said, if you accidentally picked those wave solutions that do represent the physical fields, then all you have described is automatically incorporated.
                $endgroup$
                – gented
                Mar 7 at 16:52















              14












              $begingroup$

              The wave equations for electromagnetic waves in free space can be derived from Maxwell's equations. However, Maxwell's equations can be used to describe much more. For example, you can derive from them, how an electromagnetic wave is launched from an antenna. Or you can treat electrostatic and magnetostatic phenomena. You can learn from them how electric motors work, and how we can convert mechanical into electric energy in generators. There is a huge wealth of physics in these four equations, which has enormous importance for most of the phenomena we observe around us, and for much of today's modern technology.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$












              • $begingroup$
                I am talking of maxwell's equations in free space. No antennas or motors etc. I am asking when we write maxwell's equations in free space and then from those equations derive the wave equation , is any information lost in the derivation??
                $endgroup$
                – Kavita Juneja
                Mar 7 at 14:45











              • $begingroup$
                You should really explain why the two are non-equivalent, though (the reason being, not all solutions to wave equations are physical solutions for electric and magnetic field); this said, if you accidentally picked those wave solutions that do represent the physical fields, then all you have described is automatically incorporated.
                $endgroup$
                – gented
                Mar 7 at 16:52













              14












              14








              14





              $begingroup$

              The wave equations for electromagnetic waves in free space can be derived from Maxwell's equations. However, Maxwell's equations can be used to describe much more. For example, you can derive from them, how an electromagnetic wave is launched from an antenna. Or you can treat electrostatic and magnetostatic phenomena. You can learn from them how electric motors work, and how we can convert mechanical into electric energy in generators. There is a huge wealth of physics in these four equations, which has enormous importance for most of the phenomena we observe around us, and for much of today's modern technology.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$



              The wave equations for electromagnetic waves in free space can be derived from Maxwell's equations. However, Maxwell's equations can be used to describe much more. For example, you can derive from them, how an electromagnetic wave is launched from an antenna. Or you can treat electrostatic and magnetostatic phenomena. You can learn from them how electric motors work, and how we can convert mechanical into electric energy in generators. There is a huge wealth of physics in these four equations, which has enormous importance for most of the phenomena we observe around us, and for much of today's modern technology.







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered Mar 7 at 9:43









              flaudemusflaudemus

              1,985313




              1,985313











              • $begingroup$
                I am talking of maxwell's equations in free space. No antennas or motors etc. I am asking when we write maxwell's equations in free space and then from those equations derive the wave equation , is any information lost in the derivation??
                $endgroup$
                – Kavita Juneja
                Mar 7 at 14:45











              • $begingroup$
                You should really explain why the two are non-equivalent, though (the reason being, not all solutions to wave equations are physical solutions for electric and magnetic field); this said, if you accidentally picked those wave solutions that do represent the physical fields, then all you have described is automatically incorporated.
                $endgroup$
                – gented
                Mar 7 at 16:52
















              • $begingroup$
                I am talking of maxwell's equations in free space. No antennas or motors etc. I am asking when we write maxwell's equations in free space and then from those equations derive the wave equation , is any information lost in the derivation??
                $endgroup$
                – Kavita Juneja
                Mar 7 at 14:45











              • $begingroup$
                You should really explain why the two are non-equivalent, though (the reason being, not all solutions to wave equations are physical solutions for electric and magnetic field); this said, if you accidentally picked those wave solutions that do represent the physical fields, then all you have described is automatically incorporated.
                $endgroup$
                – gented
                Mar 7 at 16:52















              $begingroup$
              I am talking of maxwell's equations in free space. No antennas or motors etc. I am asking when we write maxwell's equations in free space and then from those equations derive the wave equation , is any information lost in the derivation??
              $endgroup$
              – Kavita Juneja
              Mar 7 at 14:45





              $begingroup$
              I am talking of maxwell's equations in free space. No antennas or motors etc. I am asking when we write maxwell's equations in free space and then from those equations derive the wave equation , is any information lost in the derivation??
              $endgroup$
              – Kavita Juneja
              Mar 7 at 14:45













              $begingroup$
              You should really explain why the two are non-equivalent, though (the reason being, not all solutions to wave equations are physical solutions for electric and magnetic field); this said, if you accidentally picked those wave solutions that do represent the physical fields, then all you have described is automatically incorporated.
              $endgroup$
              – gented
              Mar 7 at 16:52




              $begingroup$
              You should really explain why the two are non-equivalent, though (the reason being, not all solutions to wave equations are physical solutions for electric and magnetic field); this said, if you accidentally picked those wave solutions that do represent the physical fields, then all you have described is automatically incorporated.
              $endgroup$
              – gented
              Mar 7 at 16:52











              2












              $begingroup$

              Remaining to the case of Maxwell's equations (ME) in vacuum, there is no equivalence between the wave equations for the fields and the original set. As already pointed out, solutions of ME are a subset of the solutions of the two three-dimensional wave equations.



              The case made by Emilio Pisanty (one loses information about the transversality) has to be taken as just one example of the non-equivalence. Another information which gets lost is the phase relation between magnetic and electric field.



              From a mathematical point of view it is not difficult to understand the reason of the non-equivalence: in order to derive the wave equations one has to



              1. take the curl of one of the equations containing the time derivative of a field;

              2. use the other equation to rewrite the time derivative of a curl as a second time derivative.

              It is clear that the additional derivative implied by step 1 may eliminate some information. It is quite well known that if one takes additional derivatives of a differential equations, the resulting equation usually has more solutions than the original one and one has to choose among them those satisfying the original equation.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$












              • $begingroup$
                It's not just the phase relation between the two fields - it's the loss of any connection at all between them. You can zero out one of the fields, or replace it with some completely different solution, and the wave equations won't blink an eye.
                $endgroup$
                – Emilio Pisanty
                Mar 8 at 10:16










              • $begingroup$
                Sure. I wrote "another" information. Your point goes directly at the core of the problem: one could have a wave "only magnetic" or "only electric". Although I know some crackpot who thinks this would be possible...
                $endgroup$
                – GiorgioP
                Mar 8 at 17:14















              2












              $begingroup$

              Remaining to the case of Maxwell's equations (ME) in vacuum, there is no equivalence between the wave equations for the fields and the original set. As already pointed out, solutions of ME are a subset of the solutions of the two three-dimensional wave equations.



              The case made by Emilio Pisanty (one loses information about the transversality) has to be taken as just one example of the non-equivalence. Another information which gets lost is the phase relation between magnetic and electric field.



              From a mathematical point of view it is not difficult to understand the reason of the non-equivalence: in order to derive the wave equations one has to



              1. take the curl of one of the equations containing the time derivative of a field;

              2. use the other equation to rewrite the time derivative of a curl as a second time derivative.

              It is clear that the additional derivative implied by step 1 may eliminate some information. It is quite well known that if one takes additional derivatives of a differential equations, the resulting equation usually has more solutions than the original one and one has to choose among them those satisfying the original equation.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$












              • $begingroup$
                It's not just the phase relation between the two fields - it's the loss of any connection at all between them. You can zero out one of the fields, or replace it with some completely different solution, and the wave equations won't blink an eye.
                $endgroup$
                – Emilio Pisanty
                Mar 8 at 10:16










              • $begingroup$
                Sure. I wrote "another" information. Your point goes directly at the core of the problem: one could have a wave "only magnetic" or "only electric". Although I know some crackpot who thinks this would be possible...
                $endgroup$
                – GiorgioP
                Mar 8 at 17:14













              2












              2








              2





              $begingroup$

              Remaining to the case of Maxwell's equations (ME) in vacuum, there is no equivalence between the wave equations for the fields and the original set. As already pointed out, solutions of ME are a subset of the solutions of the two three-dimensional wave equations.



              The case made by Emilio Pisanty (one loses information about the transversality) has to be taken as just one example of the non-equivalence. Another information which gets lost is the phase relation between magnetic and electric field.



              From a mathematical point of view it is not difficult to understand the reason of the non-equivalence: in order to derive the wave equations one has to



              1. take the curl of one of the equations containing the time derivative of a field;

              2. use the other equation to rewrite the time derivative of a curl as a second time derivative.

              It is clear that the additional derivative implied by step 1 may eliminate some information. It is quite well known that if one takes additional derivatives of a differential equations, the resulting equation usually has more solutions than the original one and one has to choose among them those satisfying the original equation.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$



              Remaining to the case of Maxwell's equations (ME) in vacuum, there is no equivalence between the wave equations for the fields and the original set. As already pointed out, solutions of ME are a subset of the solutions of the two three-dimensional wave equations.



              The case made by Emilio Pisanty (one loses information about the transversality) has to be taken as just one example of the non-equivalence. Another information which gets lost is the phase relation between magnetic and electric field.



              From a mathematical point of view it is not difficult to understand the reason of the non-equivalence: in order to derive the wave equations one has to



              1. take the curl of one of the equations containing the time derivative of a field;

              2. use the other equation to rewrite the time derivative of a curl as a second time derivative.

              It is clear that the additional derivative implied by step 1 may eliminate some information. It is quite well known that if one takes additional derivatives of a differential equations, the resulting equation usually has more solutions than the original one and one has to choose among them those satisfying the original equation.







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited Mar 8 at 10:14









              Emilio Pisanty

              86.4k23214434




              86.4k23214434










              answered Mar 7 at 16:27









              GiorgioPGiorgioP

              4,2501628




              4,2501628











              • $begingroup$
                It's not just the phase relation between the two fields - it's the loss of any connection at all between them. You can zero out one of the fields, or replace it with some completely different solution, and the wave equations won't blink an eye.
                $endgroup$
                – Emilio Pisanty
                Mar 8 at 10:16










              • $begingroup$
                Sure. I wrote "another" information. Your point goes directly at the core of the problem: one could have a wave "only magnetic" or "only electric". Although I know some crackpot who thinks this would be possible...
                $endgroup$
                – GiorgioP
                Mar 8 at 17:14
















              • $begingroup$
                It's not just the phase relation between the two fields - it's the loss of any connection at all between them. You can zero out one of the fields, or replace it with some completely different solution, and the wave equations won't blink an eye.
                $endgroup$
                – Emilio Pisanty
                Mar 8 at 10:16










              • $begingroup$
                Sure. I wrote "another" information. Your point goes directly at the core of the problem: one could have a wave "only magnetic" or "only electric". Although I know some crackpot who thinks this would be possible...
                $endgroup$
                – GiorgioP
                Mar 8 at 17:14















              $begingroup$
              It's not just the phase relation between the two fields - it's the loss of any connection at all between them. You can zero out one of the fields, or replace it with some completely different solution, and the wave equations won't blink an eye.
              $endgroup$
              – Emilio Pisanty
              Mar 8 at 10:16




              $begingroup$
              It's not just the phase relation between the two fields - it's the loss of any connection at all between them. You can zero out one of the fields, or replace it with some completely different solution, and the wave equations won't blink an eye.
              $endgroup$
              – Emilio Pisanty
              Mar 8 at 10:16












              $begingroup$
              Sure. I wrote "another" information. Your point goes directly at the core of the problem: one could have a wave "only magnetic" or "only electric". Although I know some crackpot who thinks this would be possible...
              $endgroup$
              – GiorgioP
              Mar 8 at 17:14




              $begingroup$
              Sure. I wrote "another" information. Your point goes directly at the core of the problem: one could have a wave "only magnetic" or "only electric". Although I know some crackpot who thinks this would be possible...
              $endgroup$
              – GiorgioP
              Mar 8 at 17:14











              1












              $begingroup$

              In the so-called Lorenz gauge Maxwell's equations take the form of a set of inhomogeneous wave equations in terms of the potential. All of the physics is described at least as well by these. Maxwell's equations can be written in covariant notation as $partial_mu F^munu = partial_mu partial^mu A^nu - partial_mu partial^nu A^mu = - j^nu /epsilon_0 $. Choosing the Lorenz gauge, $partial_mu A^mu = 0$ reduces this to the inhomogeneous wave equations, $ partial_mu partial^mu A^nu = - j^nu /epsilon_0 $.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$

















                1












                $begingroup$

                In the so-called Lorenz gauge Maxwell's equations take the form of a set of inhomogeneous wave equations in terms of the potential. All of the physics is described at least as well by these. Maxwell's equations can be written in covariant notation as $partial_mu F^munu = partial_mu partial^mu A^nu - partial_mu partial^nu A^mu = - j^nu /epsilon_0 $. Choosing the Lorenz gauge, $partial_mu A^mu = 0$ reduces this to the inhomogeneous wave equations, $ partial_mu partial^mu A^nu = - j^nu /epsilon_0 $.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$















                  1












                  1








                  1





                  $begingroup$

                  In the so-called Lorenz gauge Maxwell's equations take the form of a set of inhomogeneous wave equations in terms of the potential. All of the physics is described at least as well by these. Maxwell's equations can be written in covariant notation as $partial_mu F^munu = partial_mu partial^mu A^nu - partial_mu partial^nu A^mu = - j^nu /epsilon_0 $. Choosing the Lorenz gauge, $partial_mu A^mu = 0$ reduces this to the inhomogeneous wave equations, $ partial_mu partial^mu A^nu = - j^nu /epsilon_0 $.






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  In the so-called Lorenz gauge Maxwell's equations take the form of a set of inhomogeneous wave equations in terms of the potential. All of the physics is described at least as well by these. Maxwell's equations can be written in covariant notation as $partial_mu F^munu = partial_mu partial^mu A^nu - partial_mu partial^nu A^mu = - j^nu /epsilon_0 $. Choosing the Lorenz gauge, $partial_mu A^mu = 0$ reduces this to the inhomogeneous wave equations, $ partial_mu partial^mu A^nu = - j^nu /epsilon_0 $.







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  edited Mar 7 at 21:35

























                  answered Mar 7 at 10:41









                  my2ctsmy2cts

                  5,7722719




                  5,7722719



























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f465013%2fare-wave-equations-equivalent-to-maxwells-equations-in-free-space%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown






                      Popular posts from this blog

                      How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

                      Bahrain

                      Postfix configuration issue with fips on centos 7; mailgun relay