2

The Wave Equation in Classical Optics

2.1 INTRODUCTION
The concept of the interference of waves, developed in mechanics in the eighteenth
century, was introduced into optics by Thomas Young at the beginning of the
nineteenth century. In the eighteenth century the mathematical physicists Euler,
dAlembert, and Lagrange had developed the wave equation from Newtonian
mechanics and investigated its consequences, e.g., propagating and standing
waves. It is not always appreciated that Youngs leap of genius was to take the
ideas developed in one eld, mechanics, and apply them to the completely dierent
eld of optics.
In addition to borrowing the idea of wave interference, Young found that it
was also necessary to use another idea from mechanics. He discovered that the
superposition of waves was insucient to describe the phenomenon of optical inter-
ference; it, alone, did not lead to the observed interference pattern. To describe the
interference pattern he also borrowed the concept of energy from mechanics. This
concept had been developed in the eighteenth century, and the relation between the
amplitude of a wave and its energy was clearly understood. In short, the mechanical
developments of the eighteenth century were crucial to the work of Young and to the
development of optics in the rst half of the nineteenth century. It is dicult to
imagine the rapid progress which took place in optics without these previous devel-
opments. In order to have a better understanding of the wave equation and how it
arose in mechanics and was then applied to optics, we now derive the wave equation
from Newtons laws of motion.
2.2 THE WAVE EQUATION
Consider a homogeneous string of length l xed at both ends and under tension T
0
,
as shown in Fig. 2-1. The lateral displacements are assumed to be small compared
with l. The angle between any small segment of the string and the straight line
(dashed) joining the points of support are suciently small so that sin is closely
approximated by tan . Similarly, the tension T
0
in the string is assumed to be
unaltered by the small lateral displacements; the motion is restricted to the xy plane.
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
The dierential equation of motion is obtained by considering a small element
ds of the string and is shown exaggerated as the segment AB in Fig. 2-1. The y
component of the force acting on ds consists of F
1
and F
2
. If
1
and
2
are small, then
F
1
= T
0
sin
1
T
0
tan
1
= T
0
oy
ox
_ _
A
(2-1a)
F
2
= T
0
sin
2
T
0
tan
2
= T
0
oy
ox
_ _
B
(2-1b)
where the derivatives are partials because y depends on time t as well as on the
distance x. The subscripts signify that the derivatives are to be evaluated at points
A and B, respectively. Then, by Taylors expansion theorem,
oy
ox
_ _
A
=
oy
ox

o
ox
oy
ox
_ _
dx
2
=
oy
ox

o
2
y
ox
2
dx
2
(2-2a)
oy
ox
_ _
B
=
oy
ox

o
ox
oy
ox
_ _
dx
2
=
oy
ox

o
2
y
ox
2
dx
2
(2-2b)
in which the derivatives without subscripts are evaluated at the midpoint of ds. The
resultant force in the y direction is
F
2
F
1
= T
0
o
2
y
ox
2
_ _
dx (2-3)
If , is the mass per unit length of the string, the inertial reaction (force) of the
element ds is ,ds(o
2
y,ot
2
). For small displacements, ds can be written as ds dx.
The equation of motion is then obtained by equating the inertial reaction to the
applied force (2-3), so we have
o
2
y
ot
2
=
T
0
,
o
2
y
ox
2
(2-4)
Equation (2-4) is the wave equation in one dimension. In optics y(x, t) is equated
with the optical disturbance u(x, t). Also, the ratio of the tension to the density in
the string T/, is found to be related to the velocity of propagation v by the equation:
v
2
=
T
0
,
(2-5)
Figure 2-1 Derivation of the wave equation. Motion of a string under tension.
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
The form of (2-5) is easily derived by a dimensional analysis of (2-4). Equation (2-4)
can then be written as
o
2
u(x, t)
ox
2
=
1
v
2
o
2
u(x, t)
ot
2
(2-6)
in which form it appears in optics. Equation (2-6) describes the propagation of an
optical disturbance u(x, t) in a direction x at a time t. For a wave propagating in
three dimensions it is easy to show that the wave equation is
o
2
u(r, t)
ox
2

o
2
u(r, t)
oy
2

o
2
u(r, t)
oz
2
=
1
v
2
o
2
u(r, t)
ot
2
(2-7)
where r = (x
2
y
2
z
2
)
1,2
. Equation (2-7) can be written as
V
2
u(r, t) =
1
v
2
o
2
u(r, t)
ot
2
(2-8)
where V
2
is the Laplacian operator,
V
2

o
2
ox
2

o
2
oy
2

o
2
oz
2
(2-9)
Because of the fundamental importance of the wave equation in both mechanics and
optics, it has been thoroughly investigated. Equation (2-7) shall now be solved in
several ways. Each method of solution yields useful insights.
2.2.1 Plane Wave Solution
Let r(x, y, z) be a position vector of a point P in space, s(s
x
, s
y
, s
z
) a unit vector in a
xed direction. Any solution of (2-7) of the form:
u = u(s

r, t) (2-10)
is said to represent a plane-wave solution, since at each instant of time u is constant
over each of the planes,
s

r = constant (2-11)
Equation (2-11) is the vector equation of a plane; a further discussion of plane waves
and (2-11) will be given later.
Figure 2-2 shows a Cartesian coordinate sytem Ox, Oy, Oz. We now choose a
new set of Cartesian axes, O, O, Oj, with O in the direction s

r = . Then
o,ox = (o,ox)

o,o, etc., so
s
x
x s
y
y s
z
z = (2-12a)
and we can write
o
ox
= s
x
o
o
o
oy
= s
y
o
o
o
oz
= s
z
o
o
(2-12b)
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Since s
2
x
s
2
y
s
2
z
= 1, we easily nd that
V
2
u =
o
2
u
o
2
(2-13)
so that (2-8) becomes
o
2
u
o
2

1
v
2
o
2
u
ot
2
= 0 (2-14)
Thus, the transformation (2-12) reduces the three-dimensional wave equation to a
one-dimensional wave equation. Next, we set
vt = p vt = q (2-15)
and substitute (2-15) into (2-14) to nd
o
2
u
opoq
= 0 (2-16)
The solution of (2-16) is
u = u
1
( p) u
2
(q) (2-17)
as a simple dierentiation quickly shows. Thus, the general solution of (2-14) is
u = u
1
(s

r vt) u
2
(s

r vt) (2-18)
where u
1
and u
2
are arbitrary functions. The argument of u is unchanged when (, t)
is replaced by ( vt, t t), where t is an arbitrary time. Thus, u
1
( vt) represents a
disturbance which is propagated with a velocity v in the negative direction.
Similarly, u
2
( vt) represents a disturbance which is propagated with a velocity v
in the positive direction.
2.2.2 Spherical Waves
Next, we consider solutions representing spherical waves, i.e.,
u = (r, t) (2-19)
Figure 2-2 Propagation of plane waves.
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
where r = r [ [ = (x
2
y
2
z
2
)
1,2
. Using the relations
o
ox
=
or
ox
o
or
=
x
r
ox
or
, etc. (2-20)
one nds after a straightforward calculation that
V
2
(u) =
1
r
o
2
(ru)
or
2
(2-21)
The wave equation (2-8) then becomes
o
2
(ru)
or
2

1
v
2
o
2
(ru)
ot
2
= 0 (2-22)
Following (2-14) the solution of (2-22) is
u(r, t) =
u
1
(r vt)
r

u
2
(r vt)
r
(2-23)
where u
1
and u
2
are, again, arbitrary functions. The rst term in (2-23) represents a
spherical wave diverging from the origin, and the second term is a spherical wave
converging toward the origin; the velocity of propagation being v in both cases.
2.2.3 Fourier Transform Method
The method for solving the wave equation requires a considerable amount of insight
and experience. It would be desirable to have a formal method for solving partial
dierential equations of this type. This can be done by the use of Fourier transforms.
Let us again consider the one-dimensional wave equation:
o
2
u(, t)
o
2
=
1
v
2
o
2
u(, t)
ot
2
(2-24)
The Fourier transform pair for u(, t) is dened in the time domain, t, to be
u(, t) =
1
2
_
o
o
u(, o)e
iot
do (2-25a)
and
u(, o) =
_
o
o
u(, t)e
iot
dt (2-25b)
We can then write
o
2
u(, t)
o
2
=
1
2
_
o
o
o
2
u(, o)e
iot
o
2
do
o
2
u(, t)
ot
2
=
1
2
_
o
o
u(, o)(o
2
)e
iot
do (2-26)
so (2-24) is transformed to
o
2
u(, o)
o
2
=
o
2
u(, o)
v
2
(2-27)
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Equation (2-27) is recognized immediately as the equation of a harmonic oscillator
whose solution is
u(, o) = A(o)e
ik
B(o)e
ik
(2-28)
where k = o,v. We note that the constants of integration, A(o) and B(o), must be
written as functions of o because the partial dierentiation in (2-24) is with respect to
. The reader can easily check that (2-28) is the correct solution by dierentiating it
according to (2-27). The solution of (2-24) can then be found by substituting u(, o)
in (2-28) into the Fourier transform u(, t) in (2-25a)
u(, t) =
1
2
_
o
o
[A(o)e
ik
B(o)e
ik
]e
iot
do (2-29)
or
=
1
2
_
o
o
A(o)e
io(t,v)
do
1
2
_
o
o
B(o)e
io(t,v)
do (2-30)
From the denition of the Fourier transform, Eq. (2-25), we then see that
u(, t) = u
1
t

v
_ _
u
2
t

v
_ _
(2-31)
which is equivalent to the solution (2-18).
Fourier transforms are used throughout physics and provide a powerful
method for solving partial dierential equations. Finally, the Fourier transform
pair shows that the simplest sinusoidal solution of the wave equation is
u(, t) = Asin(ot k) Bsin(ot k) (2-32)
where A and B are constants. The reader can easily check that (2-32) is the solution
of the wave equation (2-24).
2.2.4 Mathematical Representation of the Harmonic Oscillator
Equation
Before we end the discussion of the wave equation, it is also useful to discuss, further,
the harmonic oscillator equation. From mechanics the dierential equation of the
harmonic oscillator motion is
m
d
2
x
dt
2
= kx (2-33a)
or
d
2
x
dt
2
=
k
m
x = o
2
0
x (2-33b)
where m is the mass of the oscillator, k is the force constant of the spring, and
o
0
= 2f is the angular frequency where f is the frequency in cycles per second.
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Equation (2-33b) can be solved by multiplying both sides of the equation by dx/dt =
v (v = velocity):
v
dv
dt
= o
2
0
x
dx
dt
(2-34a)
or
vdv = o
2
0
xdx (2-34b)
Integrating both sides of (2-34b) yields
v
2
2
=
o
2
0
2
x
2
A
2
(2-35a)
where A
2
is the constant of integration. Solving for v, we have
v =
dx
dt
= (A
2
o
2
0
x
2
)
1,2
(2-35b)
which can be written as
dx
(A
2
o
2
0
x
2
)
1,2
= dt (2-36)
The solution of (2-36) is well known from integral calculus and is
x = a sin(o
0
t o) (2-37)
where a and o are constants of integration. Equation (2-37) can be rewritten in
another form by using the trigonometric expansion:
sin(o
0
t o) = sin(o
0
t) cos o cos(o
0
t) sin o (2-38)
so
x(t) = Asin o
0
t Bcos o
0
t (2-39)
where
A = a cos o B = a sin o (2-40)
Another form for (2-39) is to express cos o
0
t and sin o
0
t in terms of exponents; that is,
cos o
0
t =
e
io
0
t
e
io
0
t
2
(2-41a)
sin o
0
t =
e
io
0
t
e
io
0
t
2i
(2-41b)
Substituting (2-41a) and (2-41b) into (2-39) and grouping terms leads to
x(t) = Ce
io
0
t
De
io
0
t
(2-42a)
where
C =
A iB
2
D =
A iB
2
(2-42b)
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
and C and D are complex constants. Thus, we see that the solution of the harmonic
oscillator can be written in terms of purely real quantities or complex quantities.
The form of (2-35a) is of particular interest. The dierential equation (2-33a)
clearly describes the amplitude motion of the harmonic oscillator. Let us retain the
original form of (2-33a) and multiply through by dx/dt = v, so we can write
mv
dv
dt
= kx
dx
dt
(2-43)
We now integrate both sides of (2-43), and we are led to
mv
2
2
=
kx
2
2
C (2-44)
where C is a constant of integration. Thus, by merely carrying out a formal integra-
tion we are led to a new form for describing the motion of the harmonic oscillator.
At the beginning of the eighteenth century the meaning of (2-44) was not clear. Only
slowly did physicists come to realize that (2-44) describes the motion of the harmonic
oscillator in a completely new way, namely the description of motion in terms of
energy. The terms mv
2
/2 and kx
2
/2 correspond to the kinetic energy and the
potential energy for the harmonic oscillator, respectively. Thus, early on in the
development of physics a connection was made between the amplitude and energy
for oscillatory motion. The energy of the wave could be obtained by merely squaring
the amplitude. This point is introduced because of its bearing on Youngs inter-
ference experiment, specically, and on optics, generally. The fact that a relation
exists between the amplitude of the harmonic oscillator and its energy was taken
directly over from mechanics into optics and was critical for Youngs interference
experiment. In optics, however, the energy would become known as the intensity.
2.2.5 A Note on the Equation of a Plane
The equation of a plane was stated in (2-11) to be
s

r = constant (2-11)
We can show that (2-11) does indeed describe a plane by referring to Fig. 2-2.
Inspecting the gure, we see that r is a vector with its origin at the origin of the
coordinates, so,
r = xi yj zk (2-45)
and i, j, and k are unit vectors. Similarly, from Fig. 2-2 we see that
s = s
x
i s
y
j s
z
k (2-46)
Suppose we now have a vector r
0
along s and the plane is perpendicular to s. Then
OP is the vector r r
0
and is perpendicular to s. Hence, the equation of the plane is
s

(r r
0
) = 0 (2-47)
or
s

r = (2-48)
where = s r
0
is a constant. Thus, the name plane-wave solutions arises from the
fact that the wave front is characterized by a plane of innite extent.
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
2.3 YOUNGS INTERFERENCE EXPERIMENT
In the previous section we saw that the developments in mechanics in the eighteenth
century led to the mathematical formulation of the wave equation and the concept
of energy.
Around the year 1800, Thomas Young performed a simple, but remarkable,
optical experiment known as the two-pinhole interference experiment. He showed
that this experiment could be understood in terms of waves; the experiment gave the
rst clear-cut support for the wave theory of light. In order to understand the pattern
that he observed, he adopted the ideas developed in mechanics and applied them
to optics, an extremely novel and radical approach. Until the advent of Youngs
work, very little progress had been made in optics since the researches of Newton
(the corpuscular theory of light) and Huygens (the wave theory of light). The simple
fact was that by the year 1800, aside from Snells law of refraction and the few things
learned about polarization, there was no theoretical basis on which to proceed.
Youngs work provided the rst critical step in the development and acceptance of
the wave theory of light.
The experiment carried out by Young is shown in Fig. 2-3. A source of light, o,
is placed behind two pinholes s
1
and s
2
, which are equidistant from o. The pinholes
then act as secondary monochromatic sources that are in phase, and the beams from
them are superposed on the screen at an arbitrary point P. Remarkably, when the
screen is then observed, one does not see a uniform distribution of light. Instead, a
distinct pattern consisting of bright bands alternating with dark bands is observed.
In order to explain this behavior, Young assumed that each of the pinholes, s
1
and s
2
,
emitted waves of the form:
u
1
= u
01
sin(ot kl
1
) (2-49a)
u
2
= u
02
sin(ot kl
2
) (2-49b)
where pinholes s
1
and s
2
are in the source plane A, and are distances l
1
and l
2
from a
point P(x, y) in the plane of observation . The pattern is observed on the plane Oxy
normal to the perpendicular bisector of s
1
s
2
and with the x axis parallel to s
1
s
2
. The
separation of the pinholes is d, and a is the distance between the line joining the
Figure 2-3 Youngs interference experiment.
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
pinholes and the plane of observation . For the point P(x, y) on the screen, Fig. 2-3
shows that
l
2
1
= a
2
y
2
x
d
2
_ _
2
(2-50a)
l
2
2
= a
2
y
2
x
d
2
_ _
2
(2-50b)
Thus,
l
2
2
l
2
1
= 2xd (2-51)
Equation (2-51) can be written as
(l
2
l
1
)(l
1
l
2
) = 2xd (2-52)
Now if x and y are small compared to a, then l
1
l
2
2a. Thus,
l
2
l
1
= l =
xd
a
(2-53)
At this point we now return to the wave theory. The secondary sources s
1
and
s
2
are assumed to be equal, so u
01
= u
02
= u
0
. In addition, the assumption is made
that the optical disturbances u
1
and u
2
can be superposed at P(x, y) (the principle of
coherent superposition), so
u(t) = u
1
u
2
= u
0
[sin(ot kl
1
) sin(ot kl
2
)] (2-54)
A serious problem now arises. While (2-54) certainly describes an interference behav-
ior, the parameter of time enters in the term ot. In the experiment the observed
pattern does not vary over time, so the time factor cannot enter the nal result. This
suggests that we average the amplitude u(t) over the time of observation T. The time
average of u(t) written as u(t), is then dened to be
u(t)
_ _
= lim
To
_
T
0
u(t) dt
_
T
0
dt
(2-55a)
= lim
To
1
T
_
T
0
u(t) dt (2-55b)
Substituting (2-54) into (2-55) yields
u(t)
_ _
= lim
To
u
0
T
_
T
0
[sin(ot kl
1
)sin(ot kl
2
)] dt (2-56)
Using the trigonometric identity:
sin(ot kl ) = sin(ot) cos(kl ) cos(ot) sin(kl ) (2-57)
and averaging over one cycle in (2-56) yields
u(t)) = 0 (2-58)
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This is not observed. That is, the time average of the amplitude is calculated to be
zero, but observation shows that the pattern exhibits nonzero intensities. At this
point we must abandon the idea that the interference phenomenon can be explained
only in terms of amplitudes u(t). Another idea must now be borrowed from
mechanics. Namely, the optical disturbance must be described in terms of squared
quantities, analogous to energy, u
2
(t). But this, too, contains a time factor. Again, a
time average is introduced, and a new quantity, I, in optics called the intensity, is
dened:
I = u
2
(t)
_ _
= lim
To
1
T
_
T
0
u
2
(t) dt (2-59)
Substituting u
2
(t) = (u
0
sin(ot kl))
2
into (2-59) and averaging over one cycle yields
I = u
2
(t)
_ _
= lim
To
1
T
_
T
0
u
2
0
sin
2
(ot kl ) dt
=
u
2
0
2
= I
0
(2-60)
Thus, the intensity is constant over time; this behavior is observed.
The time average of u
2
(t) is now applied to the superposed amplitudes (2-54).
Squaring u
2
(t) yields
u
2
(t) =u
2
0
[sin
2
(ot kl
1
) sin
2
(ot kl
2
) 2sin(ot kl
1
) sin(ot kl
2
)] (2-61)
The last term is called the interference. Equation (2-61) can be rewritten with the help
of the well-known trigonometric identity:
2 sin(ot kl
1
) sin(ot kl
2
) = cos(k[l
2
l
1
]) cos(2ot k[l
1
l
2
]) (2-62)
Thus, (2-61) can be written as
u
2
(t) = u
2
0
[sin
2
(ot kl
1
) sin
2
(ot kl
2
)
cos(k[l
2
l
1
]) cos(2ot k[l
1
l
2
])] (2-63)
Substituting (2-63) into (2-59), we obtain the intensity on the screen to be
I = u
2
(t)
_ _
= 2I
0
[1 cos k(l
2
l
1
)] = 4I
0
cos
2
k(l
2
l
1
)
2
_ _
(2-64a)
or
I = 4I
0
cos
2
kxd
2a
(2-64b)
where, from (2-53)
l
2
l
1
= l =
xd
a
(2-53)
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Equation (2-64b) is Youngs famous interference formula. We note that from (2-60)
we would expect the intensity from a single source to be u
2
0
,2 = I
0
, so the intensity
from two independent optical sources would be 2I. Equation (2-64a) [or (2-64b)]
shows a remarkable result, namely, when the intensity is observed from a single
source in which the beam is divided, the observed intensity varies between 0
and 4I
0
; the intensity can be double or even zero from that expected from two
independent optical sources! We see from (2-64b) that there will be maximum
intensities (4I
0
) at
x =
azn
d
n = 0, 1, 2, . . . (2-65a)
and minimum intensities (null) at
x =
az
d
2n 1
2
_ _
n = 0, 1, 2, . . . (2-65b)
Thus, in the vicinity of O on the plane an interference pattern consisting of bright
and dark bands is aligned parallel to the OY axis (at right angles to the line s
1
s
2
joining the two sources).
Youngs experiment is of great importance because it was the rst step in
establishing the wave theory of light and was the rst theory to provide an explana-
tion of the observed interference pattern. It also provides a method, albeit one of low
precision, of measuring the wavelength of light by measuring d, a, and the fringe
spacing according to (2-65a) or (2-65b). The separation x between the central
bright line and the rst bright line is, from (2-65a),
x = x
1
x
0
=
az
d
(2-66)
The expected separation on the observing screen can be found by assuming the
following values:
a = 100 cm d = 0.1 cm
z = 5 10
5
cm x = 0.05 cm = 0.5 mm
(2-67)
The resolution of the human eye at a distance of 25 cm is, approximately, of the same
order of magnitude, so the fringes can be observed with the naked eye.
Youngs interference gave the rst real support for the wave theory. However,
aside from the important optical concepts introduced here to explain the interference
pattern, there is another reason for discussing Youngs interference experiment.
Around 1818, Fresnel and Arago repeated his experiments with polarized light to
determine the eects, if any, on the interference phenomenon. The results
were surprising to understand in their entirety. To explain these experiments it
was necessary to understand the nature and properties of polarized light. Before
we turn to the subject of polarized light, however, we discuss another topic
of importance, namely, the reection and transmission of a wave at an interface
separating two dierent media.
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
2.4 REFLECTION AND TRANSMISSION OF A WAVE AT AN
INTERFACE
The wave theory and the wave equation allow us to treat an important problem,
namely, the reection and transmission of wave at an interface between two dierent
media. Specically, in optics, light is found to be partially reected and partially
transmitted at the boundary of two media characterized by dierent refractive
indices. The treatment of this problem was rst carried out in mechanics, however,
and shows how the science of mechanics paved the way for the introduction of the
wave equation into optics.
Two media can be characterized by their ability to support two dierent
velocities v
1
and v
2
. In Fig. 2-4 we show an incident wave coming from the left
which is partially transmitted and reected at the interface (boundary).
We saw earlier that the solution of the wave equation in complex form is
u(x) = Ae
ikx
Be
ikx
(2-68)
where k =o/v. The time factor exp(iot) has been suppressed. The term Ae
ikx
describes propagation to the right, and the term Be
ikx
describes propagation to
the left. The elds to the left and right of the interface (boundary) can be described
by a superposition of waves propagating to the right and left, that is,
u
1
(x) = Ae
ik
1
x
Be
ik
1
x
x - 0 (2-69a)
u
2
(x) = Ce
ik
2
x
De
ik
2
x
x > 0 (2-69b)
where k
1
= o/v
1
and k
2
= o/v
2
.
We must now evaluate A, B, C, and D. To do this, we assume that at the
interface the elds are continuousthat is,
u
1
(x) [
x=0
= u
2
(x) [
x=0
(2-70)
Figure 2-4 Reection and transmission of a wave at the interface between two media.
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
and that the slopes of u
1
(x) and u
2
(x) are continuous at the interfacethat is, the
derivatives of u
1
(x) and u
2
(x), so
ou
1
(x)
ox

x=0
=
ou
2
(x)
ox

x=0
(2-71)
We also assume that there is no source of waves in the medium to the right of the
interface, i.e, D = 0. This means that the wave which propagates to the left on the left
side of the interface is due only to reection of the incident wave.
With D = 0, and applying the boundary conditions in (2-70) and (2-71) to
(2-69a) and (2-69b) we easily nd
A B = C (2-72a)
k
1
A k
1
B = k
2
C (2-72b)
We solve for B and C in terms of the amplitude of the incident wave, A, and nd
B =
k
1
k
2
k
1
k
2
_ _
A (2-73a)
C =
2k
1
k
1
k
2
_ _
A (2-73b)
The B term is associated with the reected wave in (2-69a). If k
1
= k
2
, i.e., the two
media are the same, then (2-73a) and (2-73b) show that B = 0 and C = A; that is,
there is no reected wave, and we have complete transmission as expected.
We can write (2-69a) as the sum of an incident wave u
i
(x) and a reected
wave u
r
(x):
u
1
(x) = u
i
(x) u
r
(x) (2-74a)
and we can write (2-69b) as a transmitted wave:
u
2
(x) = u
t
(x) (2-74b)
The energies corresponding to u
i
(x), u
r
(x), and u
t
(x), are then the squares of these
quantities. We can use complex quantities to bypass the formal time-averaging
procedure and dene the energies of these waves to be
c
i
= u
i
(x)u
+
i
(x) (2-75a)
c
r
= u
r
(x)u
+
r
(x) (2-75b)
c
t
= u
t
(x)u
+
t
(x) (2-75c)
The principle of conservation of energy requires that
c
i
= c
r
c
t
(2-76)
The elds u
i
(x), u
r
(x), and u
t
(x) from (2-69a) and (2-69b) are
u
i
(x) = Ae
ik
1
x
(2-77a)
u
r
(x) = Be
ik
1
x
(2-77b)
u
t
(x) = Ce
ik
2
x
(2-77c)
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
The energies corresponding to (2-77) are then substituted in (2-76), and we nd
A
2
= B
2
C
2
(2-78a)
or
B
A
_ _
2

C
A
_ _
2
= 1 (2-78b)
The quantities (B/A)
2
and (C/A)
2
are the normalized reection and transmission
coecients, which we write as R and T, respectively. Thus, (2-78b) becomes
R T = 1 (2-79a)
where
R =
k
1
k
2
k
1
k
2
_ _
2
(2-79b)
T =
2k
1
k
1
k
2
_ _
2
(2-79c)
from (2-73a) and (2-73b). Equation (2-79b) and (2-79c) can be seen to satisfy the
conservation condition (2-79a).
The coecients B and C show an interesting behavior, which is as follows.
From (2-73a) and (2-73b) we write
B
A
=
1 k
2
,k
1
1 k
2
,k
1
(2-80a)
C
A
=
2
1 k
2
,k
1
(2-80b)
where
k
2
k
1
=
o,v
2
o,v
1
=
v
1
v
2
(2-80c)
Now if v
2
= 0, that is, there is no propagation in the second medium, (2-80c)
becomes
lim
v
2
0
k
2
k
1
=
v
1
v
2
= o (2-81)
With this limiting value, (2-81), we see that (2-80a) and (2-80b) become
B
A
= 1 = e
i
(2-82a)
C
A
= 0 (2-82b)
Equation (2-82a) shows that there is a 180

(p rad) phase reversal upon total

reection. Thus, the reected wave is completely out of phase with the incident
wave, and we have total cancellation. This behavior is described by the term standing
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
waves. We now derive the equation which specically shows that the resultant wave
does not propagate.
The eld to the left of the interface is given by (2-69a) and is
u
1
(x, t) = e
iot
(Ae
ik
1
x
Be
ik
1
x
) x - 0 (2-83)
where we have reintroduced the (suppressed) time factor exp(iot). From (2-82a) we
can then write
u
1
(x, t) = Ae
iot
(e
ik
1
x
e
ik
1
x
) (2-84a)
= Ae
i(otk
1
x)
Ae
i(otk
1
x)
(2-84b)
= u

(x, t) u

(x, t) (2-84c)
where
u

(x, t) = Ae
i(otk
1
x)
(2-84d)
u

(x, t) = Ae
i(otk
1
x)
(2-84e)
The phase velocity v
p
of a wave can be dened in terms of amplitude as
v
p
=
(ou,ot)
(ou,ox)
(2-85)
Applying (2-85) to (2-84d) and (2-84e), respectively, we nd that
v
p
() =
o
k
1
(2-86a)
v
p
() =
o
k
1
(2-86b)
so the total velocity of the wave is
v = v
p
() v
p
() = 0 (2-87)
Thus, the resultant velocity of the wave is zero according to (2-87); that is, the wave
does not propagate and it appears to be standing in place. The equation for the
standing wave is given by (2-84a), which can be written as
u
1
(x, t) = 2Ae
iot
sin(k
1
x) (2-88)
It is customary to take the real part of (2-88)
u(x, t) = 2Acos(ot) sin(kx) (2-89)
where we have dropped the subscript 1. We see that there is no propagator ot kx,
so (2-89) does not describe propagation.
Thus, we see that the wave equation and wave theory lead to a correct descrip-
tion of the transmission and reection of a wave at a boundary. While this behavior
was rst studied in mechanics in the eighteenth century, it was applied with equal
success to optics in the following century. It appears that this was rst done by
Fresnel, who derived the equations for reection and transmission at an interface
between two media characterized by refractive indices n
1
and n
2
. Fresnels equations
are derived in Chapter 8.
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
With this material on the wave equation behind us, we can now turn to the
study of one of the most interesting properties of light, its polarization.
REFERENCES
Books
1. Born, M. and Wolf, E., Principles of Optics, 3rd ed., Pergamon Press, New York, 1965.
2. Whittaker, E., A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity, Vol. I, Philosophical
Society, New York, 1951.
3. Sommerfeld, A., Lectures on Theoretical Physics, Vols. IV, Academic Press, New York,
1952.
4. Towne, D. H., Wave Phenomena, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1964.
5. Becker, R. A., Introduction to Theoretical Mechanics, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1954.
Copyright 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All Rights Reserved.