Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
Concept

Linearity — where it appears

The property that the response to a sum of inputs is the sum of the responses, which is what makes superposition legal. It guarantees that no new frequency appears at the output that was not at the input, and every effect that creates one — a harmonic, a combination tone — is evidence of its failure.

Named by 6 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

One equation, and the number that decides what it does. The same oscillator released from rest at one unit of displacement, with 4 different amounts of velocity-proportional loss. Every curve is a numerical integration of a single equation with no case analysis in it; what changes between them is one dimensionless number, the damping ratio. Below one, the two exponents are a complex conjugate pair and the motion crosses zero over and over inside a decaying envelope. At one they collide into a real double root and the trace reaches the axis and stops. Above one they are two distinct real numbers, the slower of them dominates, and the return is sluggish — an overdamped system takes longer to come back than a critically damped one, which is the thing the word 'over' is doing in its name. The ratios drawn are 0.15, 0.5, 1, 2, and the first zero crossing happens at 1.75 s for ζ = 0.15, 2.42 s for ζ = 0.5, never for ζ = 1, never for ζ = 2.

The three ways of coming to rest

An oscillator with friction in it can swing and fade, arrive and stop, or crawl back so slowly it looks stuck. One equation and one number decide which. The number is not what most people would guess, and neither is the value that returns fastest.

mechanics · Pendulum Two loops, two calculations, one number. The coupling between a circular loop of radius 10 cm and a rectangle of 5 by 3 cm tilted at 35° and offset sideways, against how far apart they are along the axis. The two loops differ in area by a factor of 21 and in shape entirely. Two quantities are plotted and they lie on top of one another. One is the flux through the rectangle when a current runs in the circle, obtained by integrating the circle's Biot–Savart field over the rectangle's tilted surface. The other is the flux through the circle's disc when the same current runs in the rectangle, integrated over a disc a hundred times the area. Nothing is shared between the two calculations except the positions of the wires, and they agree to 0.075 per cent — a difference which is the quadrature's, not the physics's. This is reciprocity, and it is not obvious: there is no reason from the geometry why a small loop should catch as much of a big one's field as the big one catches of the small one's. It follows from the double line integral the two quantities can both be reduced to, which is symmetric in the two loops — and that reduction is the argument, not this figure, which is the check that the argument is true of the actual fields.

The coupling that is the same both ways

A small loop and a large one catch the same fraction of each other's field. Nothing in the geometry suggests it — one has twenty-one times the area of the other — and the two quantities are computed here by two integrals with nothing in common, over two surfaces of different shapes, agreeing to seven parts in ten thousand.

electromagnetism · Induction Three copiers, and what each of them costs. How well three copying machines reproduce a qubit, against the state's angle from the pole. The first is a linear machine built to copy the two pole states perfectly; linearity then fixes what it does everywhere else, and on an equal superposition it produces an entangled pair whose overlap with the two copies wanted is exactly 0.500. That is the no-cloning theorem written as a number rather than as an argument: no adjustment is available, because the machine's behaviour on superpositions was decided the moment its behaviour on the basis was. The second measures in a fixed basis and prepares two copies of what it found, which is perfect at the poles and averages 0.6667 over the sphere — two thirds, exactly. The third is the best machine there is, and it manages 0.8333 on every state alike: five sixths, and not one.

The state that cannot be copied

Every measurement in this collection disturbs what it measures, and the obvious way round that is to make a spare first. It cannot be done, and the reason is not a practical difficulty or a limit on how good an apparatus can be: a copier is a linear machine, so fixing what it does to two states fixes what it does to their superpositions, and what it then does is not a copy.

quantum · Measurement Nine slabs, no symmetry, and one transmission. A stack of 9 slabs of random wavenumber and random thickness, with no symmetry anywhere in it. Send a wave in from the left and the amplitude that emerges on the right is 0.6694240937; turn the stack round and send it in from the right and the amplitude is 0.6694240937. The two agree to every digit the arithmetic has. This is not a property of the stack — it survives any arrangement, any number of layers, any amount of internal reflection — but of the equation, which is unchanged when the sign of time is reversed, and the phase is protected as well as the modulus, which is the stronger statement and the one an interferometer would notice. The reflections are a different matter. Their moduli are equal too, at 0.742880, but only because nothing here absorbs; their phases differ by 1.621 radians, because the wave meets a different first surface from each side. What the theorem protects is the pair of ends, and not what the wave does on its way between them.

Swap the ends and nothing changes

Put a source at one end of the most complicated arrangement of materials anybody can build and a detector at the other, then exchange them. The reading is identical — not approximately, not on average, but to every digit the arithmetic has. Two things in physics break it, and neither of them is a shape.

waves · Wave motion The cross term, and the fact that it averages to nothing. The intensity of two waves of amplitude 1 and 0.7 added together, against the phase difference between them, in turns. A detector reads the square of the summed amplitude, which is the sum of the two intensities plus a cross term that swings between plus and minus twice the product. At no phase difference the reading is 2.89 and at half a turn it is 0.09; the flat line is what the two would give with no interference, 1.49, and it is exactly the average of the curve over a whole turn. Interference redistributes and does not create — which answers the question of where the energy goes at a dark fringe by saying that it never left.

What adding does to the energy

Waves add their amplitudes and detectors read squares, so two waves together do not deliver the sum of what each delivers. Where the two get dimmer, the natural question is where the energy went — and the answer depends entirely on whether the sources can feel each other.

waves · Superposition How far the vacuum is from being a nonlinear medium. The size of the vacuum's departure from linearity, as a fraction, against the electric field it is subjected to — thirteen decades of field and twenty-eight of correction, both logarithmic. The scale is the Schwinger field, computed here from the electron's mass and the fundamental constants as 1.32e+18 volts per metre: the field at which a pair gains its own rest energy over a Compton wavelength, and therefore the field at which the vacuum stops being a passive backdrop. The marks are the strongest fields that exist. a laboratory magnet, 10 T is 2.3e-9 of it; a hydrogen atom's own field is 3.9e-7 of it; a 10²² W/cm² laser focus is 2.1e-4 of it; the Schwinger field is 1.0e+0 of it; a magnetar, 10¹¹ T is 2.3e+1 of it. So a laboratory is twenty-eight decades from making the effect large, and a magnetar's field is above the critical one — which is why the only places the vacuum's nonlinearity has been seen are the two where the fields are not human: the ultraperipheral collision of two heavy nuclei, and the surface of a neutron star.

The one medium that was supposed to add exactly

Superposition holds because an equation is linear, and every material stops being linear at some amplitude. Empty space was the exception: Maxwell's equations are linear exactly, and two beams cross with no interaction of any kind. Quantum electrodynamics says otherwise — light scatters light, and a strong field makes the vacuum birefringent — at a field of 1.3 × 10¹⁸ volts per metre, which no laboratory has come within four decades of.

waves · Superposition

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

SuperpositionAntennaReciprocityBeatsBiot–SavartBirefringenceCharacteristic equationCritical dampingCross-sectionDampingDensity matrixDetector

All concepts