Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
Concept

Symmetry — where it appears

A transformation that leaves an arrangement unchanged, and therefore constrains what any quantity computed from it may depend on. Every conservation law is a symmetry read as a consequence, and a symmetry argument settles what a quantity cannot be without computing what it is.

Named by 18 essays across 7 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

A closed surface with the charge inside. Every field line from the enclosed charge crosses the surface exactly once on its way out, so the net flux counts the charge.

Counting what comes out, and never looking inside

Draw any closed surface. The field crossing it depends only on the charge enclosed — not on where that charge sits, not on its shape, not on anything outside.

electromagnetism · Gauss's law The field of a current loop, seen edge on. Magnetic field lines integrated from the Biot–Savart law for the current shown. Every line closes on itself: there is nowhere for one to start and nowhere for it to end, because no magnetic charge exists to end on.

The field with no ends, and the force that does no work

Magnetic field lines never start and never stop. That single absence is a law, it has survived every attempt to break it, and it makes the magnetic field a different kind of object from the electric one.

electromagnetism · Magnetism The same law, three shapes of source. Field strength against distance on logarithmic axes, for a point, a long line and a wide plane carrying charge. The exponent is the slope, and it is set by how the area of the enclosing surface grows rather than by anything about the force law.

The shape decides the falloff, and the force law never changes

A point charge gives an inverse square, a line gives an inverse, a plane gives a constant. All three come from the same law, and the exponent belongs to the geometry of the source rather than to the physics.

electromagnetism · Gauss's law Four paths, one answer. The field of a straight wire carrying 10 A, summed step by step around four closed paths in 4000 pieces each. Three of them enclose the wire and each returns 12.566 µT·m, which is μ₀I; the fourth does not enclose it and returns zero, because the outward stretch of the path and the return stretch cross the same field lines in opposite senses. Nothing about the shape survives into the answer — not the radius, not the centring, not the corners — which is what makes the law usable and also what makes it useless without a symmetry to hand.

The field that wraps a current

Ampère's law says that going once round a closed path and adding up the field counts the current threaded through it, and nothing else about the path survives into the answer. Four different loops round one wire return the same number to five decimal places — which is exactly why the law is both easy and treacherous.

electromagnetism · Ampere law How fast a spinning electron would have to turn. The equatorial speed of a uniform sphere with the electron's mass and an angular momentum of ħ/2, against the radius it is given, both logarithmically. The expression is 5ħ/4mr and it passes the speed of light at 4.83e-13 m — half a picometre, which is four hundred times larger than a hydrogen nucleus. Giving it a smaller radius only makes the answer worse: at the experimental upper bound, 10⁻¹⁸ m the equator would move at 4.8e+5 times the speed of light; at the classical electron radius the equator would move at 1.7e+2 times the speed of light; at the reduced Compton wavelength the equator would move at 1.3e+0 times the speed of light. No radius the electron is permitted to have gets anywhere near a legal answer, and the experimental bound is off the scale by eight orders of magnitude. So the angular momentum is not the angular momentum of anything going round. It is a property the particle has, in the same way a charge is, and the only thing it shares with a spinning top is the algebra it obeys — which is, admittedly, the whole of what angular momentum means in physics.

The angular momentum that is not a rotation

An electron has angular momentum, and it is not going round anything. A sphere of its mass carrying that much angular momentum would need its equator moving at half a million times the speed of light at any size the electron is allowed to have. What survives of the analogy is the algebra — and the algebra turns out to require that turning the thing all the way round leaves it changed.

quantum · Spin Every line that goes in has to come out. Field lines of a 5:1 solenoid in the plane through its axis, each traced by stepping along the local direction of a field summed turn by turn from Biot–Savart. Inside the winding they are parallel and evenly spaced, which is the picture the textbook argument is about. Outside they are not absent: they are spread over the whole of the rest of space, which is why the field there is small — 1.60e-2 of the centre value at 2 radii off the axis — and why it cannot be zero. A line has no end, so every one of the lines through the bore returns outside, and a field with no outside would be a field whose lines stop.

The field outside the solenoid, which is not zero

Ampère's law says the field outside a solenoid vanishes, and every step of that argument is exact — for a winding of infinite length. A real one is a bar magnet seen from outside, its external field falls as the inverse square of its length rather than to nothing, and the "exactly zero" that makes the derivation so satisfying is the one part of it a laboratory cannot have.

electromagnetism · Ampere law How much of the answer a finite wire gives back. The field beside a straight segment of wire, divided by what the infinite-wire formula would give, against the length of the segment in units of the distance to the field point, on a logarithmic horizontal axis. The field is integrated element by element along the segment rather than evaluated from a closed form. A wire ten times as long as the distance already gives 92.8 per cent of the infinite answer, and one as long as the distance gives 45 — which is the practical content, and the reason the infinite-wire result is used for laboratory wires without apology. The second column is the part that matters for the law rather than for the number. The circulation of this field round a circle of radius d is not μ₀I; it falls short by exactly the fraction the segment fails to subtend. What makes up the difference is the displacement current of the charge piling up at the segment's two ends, and the two terms, both integrated here, sum to μ₀I to within 2.2e-8 per cent at every length. So Ampère's law is not approximately true for an open circuit and exactly true for a closed one — it is exactly true always, and it is a computation only when symmetry supplies the direction and the magnitude along the loop. Symmetry is doing the work; the law is doing the bookkeeping.

The law that is always true and rarely useful

Ampère's law holds for every loop and every current. Apply it to a wire of finite length and it gives an answer that is wrong by half — until the displacement current of the charge piling up at the wire's two ends is put back in, whereupon the two terms sum to μ₀I exactly at every length. The law was never approximate. It was never a computation either.

electromagnetism · Ampere law Three quantities that do not move while everything else does. On the left, an orbit in an inverse-square attraction, integrated from its equation of motion over 2.4 revolutions at an eccentricity of 0.55. On the right, three quantities computed from that same trajectory at every step and plotted against time: the energy, the angular momentum, and the length of the eccentricity vector that points at periapsis. Every one is flat to better than 1.2e-11 in units where the circular speed at r = 1 is 1, and none of them was constrained to be — the integrator was given the force and nothing else. Each is a symmetry seen sideways. The energy is constant because the force law does not mention the time; the angular momentum is constant because it does not mention the direction; and the eccentricity vector is constant because of a symmetry that is not a motion of space at all, which is why the inverse square closes its orbits and its neighbours do not. What the picture cannot show is the direction of the argument: it demonstrates that these three are constant here, and the theorem says something much stronger, that a constant exists for every continuous symmetry whatever the system.

The conservation law a symmetry hands over

Energy, momentum and angular momentum are usually presented as three separate empirical facts that happen to hold. They are one fact three times: every continuous symmetry of a system's action supplies a quantity that does not change, the correspondence is exact, and it runs both ways.

mechanics · Least action The rotation that mixes electricity into magnetism. The two Lorentz invariants of a field — E² − c²B² across and 2E·cB up — as the field is rotated by the duality transformation that takes E into cB and cB into −E. Every configuration moves on a circle, so the combination of the two invariants is preserved while neither is. A light wave sits at the origin and stays there, which is why a wave cannot be turned into anything else by this rotation; a static charge starts on the positive axis and is carried round to a pure magnetic field a quarter turn later. The source-free equations are unchanged by the whole family, so a universe with no charges in it has no way to say which field is which.

The symmetry one missing charge would complete

Maxwell's equations with no sources are unchanged by rotating the electric field into the magnetic one. With sources they are not, and the only thing missing is magnetic charge — which, if one existed anywhere, would force every electric charge in the universe to be a multiple of a fixed unit.

electromagnetism · Maxwell equations The arrow the orbit cannot turn. A Kepler orbit of eccentricity 0.6, integrated for two revolutions, with the Laplace–Runge– Lenz vector constructed from the position and velocity at five points along it. Every one of the five is the same arrow: its length varies by 3.7e-11 over the whole run and its direction by 2.1e-10 radians. It points at the perihelion and its length is 0.600000, which is the orbit's eccentricity measured independently from the closest and furthest radii as 0.600000. Energy and angular momentum fix the size and shape of an orbit and say nothing about which way it points; this vector is the missing statement, and only an inverse square has one.

The arrow that says which way the orbit points

Energy and angular momentum fix the size and shape of an orbit and say nothing about its orientation. The inverse-square force has a third conserved quantity that supplies it — a vector pointing at the perihelion whose length is the eccentricity — and no other force law does.

astrophysics · Orbit stability What comes back after one turn, and what needs two. A spin-½ pointing along z and rotated about the x axis through 720°, with the rotation integrated step by step rather than evaluated from a formula. The direction of the spin — the quantity a Stern–Gerlach magnet, a compass or any other instrument reports — is back where it started after 360°, exactly as the orientation of any other object would be. The state is not: its overlap with the state it began in has reached −1 there, and returns to +1 only after 720°. At 360° the overlap is -1.000 and ⟨σz⟩ is 1.000; At 720° the overlap is 1.000 and ⟨σz⟩ is 1.000. Both curves come off one integration of dψ/dθ = −(i/2)σx ψ whose norm is checked before anything is drawn, so the factor of two between their rates is a property of the propagation rather than of two separate formulae that were chosen to differ.

The turn that has to be made twice

Turn a spin-½ through a full circle and it does not come back. The direction it points in does, and every measurement on it does, but the state itself has changed sign — and a second full turn is needed before anything is where it started. The sign is invisible on one spin and measurable the moment a superposition has one branch turned and the other not.

quantum · Spin The pattern the whole sky is written in. The sky as a disc — zenith at the centre, horizon at the rim, equal angles at equal distances — with the sun 30° above the horizon. Each short line is the direction the electric field vibrates in at that point, and its length and darkness are how polarised the light there is. The directions are perpendicular to the plane containing the sun, the observer and the point, which puts them tangent to circles centred on the sun. The heavy arc is the locus 90° from the sun, where the polarisation is strongest — 74 per cent here — and it is a great circle rather than a patch: a band across the sky, not a region near the horizon. This is what a polarising filter on a camera acts on, and it is why turning one darkens a band of sky and leaves the rest almost untouched, and why the effect is strongest when the sun is off to one side and absent when it is behind the photographer.

The pattern the sky is written in

Scattered sunlight is polarised, so the whole sky carries a direction of vibration at every point — arranged in circles about the sun, strongest on the great circle ninety degrees away from it, and vanishing at points that were found by looking before anyone could explain them. Bees navigate by it and a camera filter reads one band of it.

optics · Polarisation One boost, three constants, three pictures. The axes of a frame moving at 0.5 in units where the constant is one, drawn for the three signs the constant can have. The faint cross is the original frame's axes; the two heavy lines are the moving frame's, obtained by boosting them rather than by tilting them by hand. With a positive constant the two axes close in on one another symmetrically, and the line they are closing on is the invariant speed. With a zero constant only the time axis tilts and the space axis stays where it was, which is absolute simultaneity — every frame agrees which events are at the same time. With a negative constant the pair rotates rigidly, like a pair of axes turned in a plane. Nothing about light has been used to draw any of them. The three are the whole of what homogeneity, isotropy, the group property and the relativity principle permit, and choosing between them is a measurement rather than a postulate.

The transformation that never mentions light

Assume space and time are homogeneous, that space is isotropic, that two changes of frame compose into a third, and that the relativity principle holds. Those four leave exactly one free constant — and three possible worlds, one of them Galileo's and one of them Einstein's. Light appears nowhere in the derivation; it enters only when the constant has to be measured.

relativity · Spacetime diagram Snell's law with space and time exchanged. Two constructions on the same diagram of frequency against wavenumber, with the light lines of a medium of index 1 and of index 1.5. On the left, a boundary in space: the wave crosses a still surface, the frequency is conserved, and the horizontal line at the incident frequency meets the new medium's line at a wavenumber 1.5 times larger — the familiar shortening of the wavelength. On the right, a boundary in time: the whole medium changes at once, the wavenumber is conserved, and the vertical line at the incident wavenumber meets the new medium's line at a frequency 0.667 times the old one. The vertical line also meets the new line's negative-frequency branch, which is a wave running backwards: a reflection in time. A spatial boundary reflects into the same frequency and a temporal one into the same wavelength.

The reflection that needs no surface

Change the refractive index of a whole medium at one instant and a wave already travelling through it splits in two, one part running on and one running back, though there is no surface anywhere for it to reflect from. A boundary in time is Snell's law with space and time exchanged: the wavelength is kept and the frequency changes, momentum is conserved and energy is not.

optics · Refraction The rectangle a spin tilts. The laboratory energy of the pion from a tau into a pion and a neutrino moving at 0.8 of the speed of light, for samples of 60,000 decays whose parents have αP = +1, 0, −1 along their line of flight. Every sample fills the same interval, 313 to 2667 MeV: the edges are set by the masses and the speed, and they do not move. Inside that interval an unpolarised sample is flat and a polarised one is tilted, its height at each energy 1 + αP times the cosine of the rest-frame angle that energy corresponds to. Reading the slope back from each sample gives +0.993, −0.010, −1.006, each with a standard error near 0.006. A parent spinning along its flight throws the pion forwards in its own frame, and the boost turns forwards into more energetic, so the tilt of an energy spectrum measures a polarisation without any angle being measured at all.

The slope a spin leaves in a spectrum

An unpolarised parent decaying in flight gives its products a rectangle of energies. Give the parent a spin along its line of flight and the rectangle tilts, while its two edges stay exactly where they were. The tilt is the polarisation, it can be read without ever seeing which way the parent was going — and which variable it is read from decides how many decays the reading costs.

relativity · Relativistic dynamics The levels that refuse to cross. The six energies of sodium 3p against an applied field from zero to 4 crossover fields, 147 T, from diagonalising spin–orbit coupling and the field together. At zero field there are two levels, 515.5 GHz apart. The two states with the largest |mⱼ| are straight lines at every field, because nothing else shares their mⱼ. The other four bend. The two states with mⱼ = −½ approach within 486.0 GHz near 12.3 T and then separate again — √2 ζ exactly, since the coupling between them sets how close they may come — while the mⱼ = −3/2 state falls straight through the lower mⱼ = +½ state at 16.6 T as if it were not there. States that the field cannot mix cross freely; states it can mix exchange character instead, and that exchange is the passage from one pattern to the other.

The field an atom calls strong

A magnetic field splits sodium's two yellow lines into ten, at spacings set by Landé's factors — until the field grows past the one the electron already feels from its own motion, when the ten reorganise into the three a theory without spin predicts. Nothing about the magnet decides which pattern appears. The atom does: the same 45 tesla is a strong field for hydrogen, a middling one for sodium and a weak one for caesium.

quantum · Atomic spectra 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 The count that works for everything with a mass. How many beams a Stern-Gerlach analyser splits a particle into, for four spins, with the photon on the bottom row. For anything with a mass the answer is 2j+1 — go to the particle's rest frame, where its spin can point in any direction, and count the projections along whichever axis the magnet defines. A spin-one particle gives three: up, down, and a middle beam that is not deflected at all. The photon has spin one and gives two. The middle state does not exist, and it is not that it is hard to produce or weakly coupled — there is no such state of the electromagnetic field. A light wave has two polarisations and the third one, in which the field would oscillate along the direction of travel, is not a solution of Maxwell's equations at all.

Two states where the counting says three

A particle of spin one has three states, and the photon has two. The missing one is not rare or weakly coupled — there is no such state of the electromagnetic field. What removes it is that a massless particle has no rest frame, so the rotations that would turn one projection into another are not available; and the state comes back the moment the particle acquires a mass, which is what a photon does in a plasma.

quantum · Spin

Named alongside it

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

SpinAngular momentumFluxMagnetic fieldMeasurementSuperpositionDegeneracyField linesGauss's lawInterferenceMagnetic momentAmperes law

All concepts