Re: metal optics - an ununderstood chapter in optics becomesunderstandable

From: josefmatz (josefmatz_at_arcor.de)
Date: 10/15/04 

Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 03:54:23 +0200

The Pointing vector is the energy flux density ! - Yes Sir ! If you think
otherwise you lie wrong !
And you can place your closed surface so that one part is in the air or
vacuum and the other side in the metal.
That is classical elektrodynamics. This leads you to the equations which
determine the field within the metal !

Your example with the capacitor and the magnetic field is no good one. We
have here electrostatics.
The electrical and magnetic field have different sources. therefore your
flux is E x 0 + 0 x H = 0
Please do not use E x H in elektrostatics - yes ? Here you have really the
only case where you can not apply
the pointing vector !

"Repeating Rifle" <salmonegg@sbcglobal.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:BD946E8D.2671C%salmonegg@sbcglobal.net...
> in article 416ef916_2@news.arcor-ip.de, josefmatz at josefmatz@arcor.de
> wrote on 10/14/04 3:13 PM:
>
> > Everybody has concerned with formulas having a complex index of
refraction.
> > One of the best prooven theories is the incident wave on a homogeneous
bulk
> > metal. Intensity and polarization of the reflected wave - everything in
well
> > agreement with the theory. But what is with the energy fluxes within
> > the bulk metal ? The books stop here. You get no answer or only
qualitative
> > answers in the books.
> <snip>
>
> There is a widespread misconception that the Poynting vector is a measure
of
> energy flux. One obvious counterexample is the the charged parallel plate
> capacitor in a constant field paralell to the plates.
>
> The Poynting theorem is an expression of the conservation of energy within
> an enclosed surface.
>
> Bill
>