Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
Concept

Reciprocity — where it appears

The symmetry that makes the transmission from A to B equal to the transmission from B to A through any passive, linear, stationary medium. It follows from the wave equation's invariance under reversing time, and the only ordinary ways to break it are a moving medium and a magnetic field.

Named by 9 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

What the return journey does to each of them. The rotation of the plane after a beam has gone through a rotator, been reflected, and come back, against the length of the rotator — divided by the one-way rotation, so the two answers are 0 and 2 and nothing else can happen. A naturally active medium is handed with respect to the beam: reverse the beam and the sense of the rotation reverses with it, and the second pass undoes the first exactly, at every length and every wavelength. A Faraday rotator is handed with respect to the field, which does not care which way the light is going, so the second pass adds to the first and the round trip is twice the single one: 1 mm of it gives 21.7° out and 43.4° back; 2 mm of it gives 43.4° out and 86.8° back; 4 mm of it gives 86.8° out and 173.6° back; 8 mm of it gives 173.6° out and 347.2° back. That is a violation of reciprocity, and it is only available because a magnetic field is odd under time reversal. Everything a passive optical component can do — a lens, a mirror, a waveplate, a piece of quartz — looks the same run backwards, and none of them can be made into a one-way street. This can.

The rotation a return trip doubles

Quartz turns the plane of polarisation and so does glass in a magnetic field. The two look identical on the way through and are opposites on the way back — the crystal undoes its own rotation exactly, and the magnet adds to it. That difference is the whole of why a one-way street for light can be built at all, and why nothing passive will ever be one.

optics · Polarisation 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 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 How much of μ₀N²A/ℓ a real coil actually has. The inductance of a 140-turn coil of radius 10 mm, divided by the long-solenoid formula μ₀N²A/ℓ, against how long the coil is compared with its diameter. The inductance is computed as a sum of Maxwell's mutual inductances between every pair of turns plus each turn's own, so the long-coil formula appears nowhere in it. At a length equal to the diameter the real coil has 68% of what the formula promises, and at a quarter of the diameter about a third. The reason is that the formula assumes every turn is threaded by the full interior field, and near the ends of a short coil the field has already begun to spread. The ratio is Nagaoka's coefficient, tabulated since 1909, and the computed points agree with the table.

The circuit that fights its own change

Every circuit is threaded by the field its own current makes, so every circuit resists having that current altered. It is the reason a coil takes time to start and the reason breaking one makes a voltage a thousand times the supply's.

electromagnetism · Induction Effusion rate against molecular mass. The rate at which a gas escapes through a small hole, against its molar mass, normalised to hydrogen. The rate is a quarter of the number density times the mean speed times the area, and the mean speed goes as the inverse square root of the mass — so the rate does too, which is Graham's law of 1848. Hydrogen escapes four times faster than oxygen and 13.3 times faster than uranium hexafluoride. The practical consequence is isotope separation, and its difficulty is on this chart. The two uranium hexafluorides differ by 3 out of 352 in mass, so a single stage enriches by a factor of only 1.00429 — four parts in a thousand. Reaching 90 per cent from natural uranium's 0.72 per cent therefore takes about 1665 ideal stages, and a real cascade needs more because each stage is imperfect. That number is why gaseous-diffusion plants were among the largest industrial structures ever built, and why centrifuges — which separate by mass directly rather than by the square root of it — replaced them.

The gradient that drives the other thing

A concentration gradient drives a flow of matter and a temperature gradient drives a flow of heat. Each also drives the other, by coefficients that are equal — a relation nobody could have guessed and which follows from the fact that the underlying motion runs the same forwards and backwards in time.

thermodynamics · Diffusion Nitrogen that runs the wrong way. The nitrogen mole fraction in each of two bulbs joined by a capillary, as in Duncan and Toor's experiment: one bulb starts with 0.50086 nitrogen and the rest carbon dioxide, the other with 0.49879 nitrogen and the rest hydrogen, at 35 °C. Solid curves: the capillary solved at each instant from the Maxwell–Stefan equations with the three pairs' diffusivities, 83.8, 68.0 and 16.8 mm²/s. Dashed: Fick's law for nitrogen alone, which can only let the two start values relax together. At the start the nitrogen gradient is 0.00207, yet nitrogen flows at 309 times the rate that gradient would drive. From 0.1 to 6.5 hours it flows from the bulb with less nitrogen into the bulb with more, opening a difference of 0.1468 at 6.5 hours; at 6.6 hours its flux passes through zero with a difference of 0.1468 still in place. Each gas is conserved to a part in 10⁹. The carbon dioxide moving out of the first bulb drags nitrogen with it, because the nitrogen–carbon dioxide pair has by far the smallest diffusivity and so the strongest friction.

The gas that flows towards more of itself

Fick's law says a substance diffuses from where there is more of it to where there is less. In a mixture of three gases, nitrogen can do the opposite for hours — flowing into the bulb that already holds more nitrogen, and then stopping while a difference remains — and in a welded bar of steel, carbon crosses into the side that is already richer. Nothing is wrong with the second law. Diffusion flattens chemical potential, and with more than two components, or a second element changing it, that is not the same as flattening concentration.

thermodynamics · Diffusion One width that falls to nothing. The decay rates of the two modes of a pair of resonances that leak into one shared channel at rates 0.1 and 0.05 and are coupled to each other with strength 0.2, against the detuning of the first from the second. The two rates always add to 0.15, the trace of the leak matrix, to 10⁻¹². Where the resonances are far apart each mode keeps roughly its own resonance's leak. Near them the leaks interfere, and at a detuning of 0.1414 — κ(γ₁ − γ₂)/√(γ₁γ₂) — the slower mode's decay rate is zero to within 10⁻¹², and the faster carries all 0.15. That mode sits at a frequency where the channel is open and does not leak into it: the two routes by which it could escape cancel.

The resonance that refuses to leak

A resonance that sits at a frequency where waves can escape has a width, because it leaks. Put two such resonances into the same channel and let them talk to each other, and at one precise detuning one of their combinations stops leaking altogether — a mode with no width, surrounded by a continuum it could escape into and does not. It cannot be seen from outside, it traps whatever energy lands in it, and if a symmetry is what forbids the leak, it survives any change that keeps the symmetry.

waves · Resonance A sheet of light a tenth of a micrometre thick. The intensity of the evanescent field in water beyond a glass coverslip (index 1.518 against 1.33), against distance from the glass, for 488 nm light totally reflected at 62°, 65°, 70°, 75°, s-polarised, relative to the light arriving in the glass. The critical angle is 61.2°. At 62° the field at the surface is 3.79 times the incident intensity and falls by e in 234 nm; at 65° the field at the surface is 3.07 times the incident intensity and falls by e in 110 nm; at 70° the field at the surface is 2.01 times the incident intensity and falls by e in 75 nm; at 75° the field at the surface is 1.15 times the incident intensity and falls by e in 63 nm. Ordinary illumination (dashed) lights the whole depth of a cell equally; totally reflected light lights only the layer against the glass, which is where a cell's membrane and the proteins in it are.

The mirror that lights a tenth of a micrometre

Total internal reflection sends back every photon, and it leaves behind a field in the medium beyond that dies away within a fraction of a wavelength. Put a living cell on a coverslip and reflect a laser inside the glass, and that field lights only the hundred nanometres of the cell pressed against the glass: the membrane, and the proteins moving in it. Nothing else glows. The same field works in reverse. A molecule close to the glass sends part of its own light into angles no ray from the water could reach, and how much it sends there says how close it is.

optics · Total internal reflection The focus that gets sharper when the wave is scattered. The refocused amplitude against distance across the source, in wavelengths, for the same one-sided mirror and pulse, with the space between empty (dashed) and with a slab of 200 lossless point scatterers, 15 wavelengths thick, filling the space between source and mirror (solid). Through the slab the wave reaching the mirror is a jumble — scattered many times, arriving from every direction the slab can send it — yet time-reversed and sent back through the same slab, it refocuses on the source, in a spot 1.5 wavelengths wide against 4.8 in empty space. The scatterers, bouncing waves in from a wide range of angles, act as a lens much wider than the mirror: disorder that would ruin an ordinary lens makes a time-reversal mirror sharper.

The mirror that sends a wave back to where it began

Record a wave as it arrives at a row of microphones, then play each recording backwards through the loudspeaker beside it, and the sound converges on the place it came from — however twisted the route it took. Huygens said every point on a wavefront acts as a source; a time-reversal mirror takes him literally, making every point of a recorded front re-emit its own history in reverse. The result has a property no lens has. Put a thicket of scatterers between the source and the mirror, so that the arriving wave is an unrecognisable jumble, and the reversed wave still finds its way back — to a sharper focus than it could reach in empty space, because the disorder acts as a lens wider than the mirror.

waves · Huygens

Named alongside it

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

Time reversalAntennaDiffusionEquilibriumFaraday's lawIrreversibilityLinearityMagnetic fluxTransport coefficientBiot–SavartChiralityCircular birefringence

All concepts