Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
The collection

Every essay — page 13

One idea per essay, ordered so that the earlier ones set up the later ones — but nothing here depends on being read in sequence.

Mechanics

Motion, force, and the quantities that refuse to change.

The reaction that reaches zero, and where the bead lets go. The force the sphere pushes back with, in units of the bead's weight, against the angle from the top. It starts at 1.000 and falls, because the speed the bead has gained needs more centripetal force than gravity's component along the radius can supply. At 48.19° it reaches zero, and past that the surface would have to pull inward to keep the bead on it — which a surface cannot do. So the bead leaves there, and the departure angle is a statement about the sign of a constraint force rather than about a speed or a height. The multiplier is what carries that sign: solve the motion in the angle alone and the reaction is absent from every equation, so nothing in the solution knows that the constraint has stopped holding, and the bead is drawn happily circling a sphere it has already left.

The force a coordinate cannot see

Writing a pendulum in terms of its angle is the first good move anybody learns, and it deletes the tension from every equation that follows. The string still breaks. Recovering the force that the clever choice of coordinate threw away turns out to be a computation with a sign in it, and the sign is where the bead leaves the sphere.

5 figures · part 3 on Least action The boundary of everywhere a given speed can reach. Trajectories at one speed and five launch angles, with the curve that bounds all of them. The boundary is not one of the trajectories and is not the 45° launch: it is the envelope of the whole family, the locus of points where two neighbouring launches cross. Distances are in units of v²/g, so the greatest range is one and the greatest height a half, and the envelope is the parabola y = ½ − x²/2 joining them. Two things about it are worth having. Its focus is the launch point exactly — every point on it is as far from the gun as from the line y = v²/g — so the safety parabola is a conic with the same focus as the trajectories themselves. And a boundary made of crossings of neighbouring members of a family is a caustic: the same construction that makes the rainbow's edge bright, drawn here with cannon shells instead of light rays.

Everywhere a throw can reach

Fix the speed and let the angle be anything. The trajectories fill a region, and the region has an edge — a curve that is not one of the trajectories, that touches each of them exactly once, and that turns out to be the same kind of object as the bright rim of a rainbow.

5 figures · part 3 on Projectile

Waves

Oscillation, and everything that turns out to be an oscillation.

A step, a wave from the rim, and what they make together. The pattern behind a straight edge, split into the two things Young said it was: the incident wave where the edge does not block it, which is a step, and a wave that appears to come from the rim itself. The step is discontinuous at the shadow boundary by the whole incident amplitude. The edge wave's magnitude is continuous there, to 0.0e+0 — it changes phase by π instead of changing size — and it is exactly half the incident amplitude on both sides, which is why the total intensity on the geometrical shadow boundary is 0.250000 of the unobstructed value rather than a half. Everywhere else the two add, and their sum reproduces the directly computed field to 0.0e+0. The fringes in the lit region are the interference of the two, which is why they are fringes at all: a monotonic decay has nothing to beat against. In the shadow there is only the edge wave, so there is nothing to interfere with and the intensity falls smoothly.

The wave that comes from the rim

A shadow's edge is not a boundary between light and no light, and the fringes on either side of it are not a smudge. The whole pattern is the sum of two things — the light nothing blocked, and a single wave that behaves in every respect as though the rim of the obstacle were radiating it — and splitting it that way is exact rather than a picture.

6 figures · part 3 on Huygens How far into the ground a surface wave goes. The horizontal and vertical displacements of a Rayleigh wave against depth, in wavelengths, at Poisson's ratio 0.25, each divided by the largest displacement anywhere. Both fall off exponentially, and at one wavelength down the vertical component is 19.3 per cent of its surface value — so the wave is confined to a skin about a wavelength thick, and the thickness is set by the wavelength rather than by anything about the material. The horizontal component changes sign at 0.193 wavelengths, which is not a node of a standing wave but a reversal: above that depth the ground moves one way round its elliptical orbit and below it the other. A long-period wave therefore samples deep rock and a short-period one samples only the surface, which is what makes a seismogram's dispersion a measurement of the structure underneath.

The wave a surface is enough to hold

A pipe guides with walls and a fibre guides with a slower core. A solid needs neither: one free surface binds a wave that is not a bulk wave bouncing but a separate solution, travelling slower than any wave in the material, dying away exponentially into it, and carrying its energy round a circle instead of over a sphere — which is why it is the part of an earthquake that knocks buildings down.

9 figures · part 3 on Guided waves Four modes of a string that is heavier in one place. The first four modes of a string whose mass per unit length rises to 5 times the light end's over a smooth bump centred 62 per cent of the way along, drawn beneath them. Nothing is symmetric any more: the shapes bunch up over the heavy region, where the local wavelength is shorter, and the amplitudes there are smaller. The frequencies are 1.70, 4.01, 6.10, 8.12, which are in the ratios 1.000, 2.361, 3.590, 4.779 rather than 1, 2, 3, 4 — this string has no harmonics and would sound like a bell rather than a violin. What has not changed is the one thing an ordering needs: the interior zeros, marked, run 0, 1, 2, 3 exactly as they do on a uniform string. That is Sturm's theorem, and the nodes here are counted on the computed shapes rather than assumed.

The count that cannot be cheated

A string with a lump in it has no harmonics, no symmetry and no obvious order to its modes. It has one thing left: the nth mode crosses the axis exactly n−1 times, whatever the string is made of. Ordering by frequency and ordering by node count turn out to be the same operation, and in two dimensions the equality quietly becomes an inequality.

5 figures · part 5 on Standing waves A reflection is shifted twice, and not by the same factor. A wave of unit frequency sent at a reflector closing at 90 km/h, in air. The target meets the fronts sooner than they arrive at a fixed point, so what reaches it is 1.072886 — the observer shift, which multiplies by (c + v)/c. It then re-emits what it received, and now it is a source running after its own wavefronts, which divides by (c − v)/c: the echo comes back at 1.157233. The two operations are different functions and only their product is symmetric, so the round trip is (c + v)/(c − v) rather than the square of either. The shift is 15.7233 per cent where a single one would be 7.2886 — a factor of two to first order in v/c and not exactly two at any speed. For light the same round trip is (1 + β)/(1 − β), which is the square of 1.000000083, and that number is the whole content of the relativistic Doppler effect rather than an approximation to it.

The shift a mirror gives twice

A moving reflector is a receiver and a source in one, so it shifts a wave twice — and the two shifts are different functions of the speed, which is why the round trip is not the square of either. Everything a speed radar does follows from that, including the two things it cannot do.

4 figures · part 6 on Doppler 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.

5 figures · part 8 on Wave motion

Optics

Light, and the small number of rules it obeys.

Rings whose radii go as the square root of their number. A 20-zone plate for 550 nanometres at 200 millimetres, drawn to scale, beside its zone radii against zone number. The outermost is 1.483 millimetres and the innermost 0.332, and the curve is a square root because the radii come from making each zone's extra path exactly half a wavelength longer than the last. The consequence worth noticing is on the drawing rather than in the formula: every ring has the same area, to 0.003 per cent, so each contributes about equally to what arrives on the axis and the rings get thinner outwards to keep it so. Alternate rings are opaque. Half the light is thrown away and the axis gets brighter, because what is thrown away is the half that would have arrived out of phase with the rest.

The lens that is a set of rings

A lens focuses by delaying the light at its centre until every path takes the same time. A zone plate does the opposite: it changes nothing about the light that gets through, and paints out the light that would have arrived out of step. Half the aperture is thrown away and the axis gets brighter, which sounds like a contradiction and is the whole idea.

7 figures · part 6 on Diffraction Past the critical angle, all that is left of a reflection is its phase. The phase each polarisation acquires on total internal reflection at an index ratio of 1.518, against angle of incidence, together with the difference between them. Below the critical angle of 41.19° there is a transmitted beam and the reflection coefficients are real; above it the transmitted wavenumber is imaginary, the coefficients have modulus exactly one — every photon comes back — and the only thing that distinguishes one angle from another is the phase. The two polarisations acquire different phases, and their difference peaks at 46.533° at an incidence of 51.05°, which the closed form puts at the same place. That difference is a retardation: a wave plate made out of an angle, with no birefringent material anywhere in it, and — because the expression contains only the index ratio — one that barely changes with colour.

The retarder with no crystal in it

A wave plate turns linear polarisation into circular by making one component travel a little further than the other, which requires a birefringent crystal cut to a thickness and works properly at one wavelength. Total internal reflection does the same job with a phase that comes from the geometry instead — and because a refractive index barely changes across the visible where a wavelength changes by a factor of two, the same block of ordinary glass is a quarter-wave plate for every colour at once.

7 figures · part 6 on Polarisation Where the refracted ray comes from, drawn with a compass. Wavevectors in units of the vacuum wavenumber, for light arriving at 30° from a medium of index 1.5 at a medium of index 1. Every direction available in the first medium lies on the circle of radius 1.5 and every direction available in the second on the circle of radius 1; the horizontal axis lies in the interface. The boundary cannot change the component along itself, because the two sides have to agree on the phase at every point of the interface, so the refracted wave is fixed by the vertical line at 0.7500 — and where that line cuts the smaller circle is the refracted direction, 48.59° from the normal. Nothing about least time or about wavefronts enters, and the ratio of sines is what the construction reads when the two radii are written as indices. The normal component is not conserved and is not meant to be: it goes from 1.2990 to 0.6614, which is the whole of the difference between the two rays.

The law that only asks about one component

A boundary between two media cannot change the part of a wave that runs along it, because both sides have to agree on the phase at every point of the surface at every instant. That single restriction produces the refracted ray, the critical angle, the evanescent field and every order of a diffraction grating, out of one drawing made with a compass.

5 figures · part 2 on Refraction

Electromagnetism

Charge, field, and the lines drawn between them.

The size of the quantum says what is carrying the current. What the flux quantum would be for each candidate carrier charge, in units of 10⁻¹⁵ webers, against the measured value drawn as a line. A single electron would give 4.1357, a pair 2.0678, a triple 1.3786. The measurement is 2.0678, which picks the pair and excludes the others by a factor of two — not by a few per cent, so no question of experimental accuracy arises. The whole of the argument is that the condensate's wavefunction must come back to itself round the ring, which makes the enclosed flux a multiple of h over the carrier's charge; measuring the multiple therefore measures the charge, without any charge ever being measured. That is how the pairing was established in 1961, four years after it was proposed and by an experiment that looks nothing like a measurement of a charge.

The two in the flux quantum

A superconducting ring cannot hold whatever flux is applied to it. It holds a whole number of quanta and drives a current to make up the difference, and the size of that quantum is Planck's constant divided by twice the electron's charge. The factor of two was measured in 1961, four years after somebody predicted that the carriers are pairs — by an experiment in which no charge is measured at all.

5 figures · part 2 on Superconductivity Two quantities that are never computed and never change. A two-dimensional field integrated for 110 steps using only the two equations that contain a time derivative — Faraday's and Ampère's. The two that do not, Gauss's law for the electric field and the statement that there are no magnetic charges, are never imposed and never checked during the run. Their residuals are plotted: the divergence of B stays below 2.4e-16 of the field's own size and the divergence of E below 2.4e-16, over the whole run, while the field itself moves and changes by a factor of 8.59. That is not a numerical coincidence. Taking the divergence of Faraday's law gives the divergence of a curl, which vanishes identically, so ∂(∇·B)/∂t is zero whatever the fields are doing; the same manoeuvre on Ampère's law gives ∂(∇·D)/∂t = −∇·J. So the two constraints are initial conditions, propagated for ever by the two that are laws of motion, and Maxwell's four equations are two dynamical ones and two statements about how the field was set up.

The two equations that are not laws of motion

Maxwell's equations are usually presented as four laws of equal standing. Two of them contain no time derivative at all, which means they cannot be evolution equations: they are conditions on the field at one instant. What makes them consistent with the other two is that the other two preserve them exactly — and one of the two preservations holds only because charge is conserved.

4 figures · part 3 on Maxwell equations

Thermodynamics

Heat, disorder, and the one law with a direction in it.

Energy, pressure and entropy of a gas nobody counted. The energy density, pressure and entropy density of blackbody radiation against temperature, on logarithmic axes, together with the pressure a monatomic gas of the same energy density would have. Every curve is a power of the temperature — the fourth for energy and pressure, the third for entropy — because the only length in the problem is the thermal wavelength and the only energy is kT. The pressure is exactly a third of the energy density, where an ordinary gas's is two thirds, a factor of 2: a photon carries momentum E/c and a slow molecule carries √(2mE), and that difference is the whole of it. Some values: at room temperature the radiation pressure is 1.86e-6 pascals, which is a ten thousand millionth of an atmosphere; at 1e+7 kelvin it is 2.52e+12, which is where radiation rather than matter holds a star up.

The gas that nobody counted

A box of gas holds however many molecules were put in it. A box of radiation holds however many photons the temperature says, because the walls make and destroy them until the free energy is least — and one dropped assumption changes every result. The pressure becomes a third of the energy density instead of two thirds, the entropy goes as the cube of the temperature, and the adiabatic index comes out at exactly four thirds.

5 figures · part 3 on Blackbody Two experiments, two computations, one coefficient. The Seebeck coefficient of a resonant conductor against where its resonance sits relative to the chemical potential, together with the Peltier coefficient divided by the temperature. The first is obtained by applying a temperature difference and finding the voltage that stops the current; the second by applying a voltage at uniform temperature and taking the ratio of the heat flow to the current. Different driving, different measurement, different integral — and the two curves agree to 3.8e-7 of the sweep's own scale across the whole of where they pass through zero and change sign. That equality is Kelvin's relation Π = ST, guessed in 1854 from an argument its author knew was not sound and proved by Onsager in 1931 from microscopic reversibility. It is not a property of this conductor; it holds for every one.

The second experiment that cannot disagree

Heat one end of a wire and a voltage appears across it. Pass a current through the same wire at uniform temperature and it carries heat. Those are two different experiments with two different apparatus, and the coefficient in front is the same number in both — not approximately, and not for some materials. The reason is that the equations of motion underneath look the same run backwards.

4 figures · part 4 on Diffusion A stiffness that does not go to zero — it falls off a cliff. The renormalised stiffness of a two-dimensional superfluid against temperature, obtained by integrating the flow of the bare stiffness and the vortex fugacity, with the bare stiffness drawn for comparison. Below the transition the vortices are bound in pairs, screen one another and leave a finite stiffness; above it they unbind and there is none. What is remarkable is the value at which it disappears: 0.6430, against 2/π = 0.6366. That number does not depend on the material, on the bare fugacity, on the core energy, or on anything else — every two-dimensional superfluid loses its stiffness at exactly two over π times its own transition temperature, and measurements on helium films of widely different thicknesses fall on that line. A transition at which a quantity jumps to zero from a value nobody can adjust is unlike anything the usual classification of transitions describes.

The transition with nothing to order

Every transition in this collection so far has an order parameter — a quantity that is zero on one side and not on the other. In two dimensions a continuous symmetry cannot break at any temperature above zero, so there is nothing for such a quantity to be, and by the usual reckoning there can be no transition. There is one anyway, and what changes at it is whether vortices are bound in pairs.

10 figures · part 7 on Phase change

Relativity

Space and time, drawn on the same axes.

How fast something looks as it moves across the sky. The apparent transverse speed of a source, in units of the speed of light, against the angle between its motion and the line of sight, at β = 0.8, β = 0.95, β = 0.99. Every curve rises above one over a range of angles, reaching 1.33 at 36.8°, 3.04 at 18.4°, 7.02 at 8.1° — and those maxima are γβ at arccos β, found by searching the drawn curves rather than put into them. Nothing is moving faster than light. What has happened is that the source has come closer between the two observations, so the second flash had less far to travel and arrived sooner than it would have done; dividing the transverse distance by the interval between arrivals therefore gives too large a speed. Below β = 1/√2 no angle produces the illusion at all, so seeing it is a measurement: it puts a floor under the speed and a ceiling on the angle at once.

The motion that measures faster than light

Take two photographs of a jet a year apart, measure how far a blob moved across the sky, divide by a year, and the answer can be seven times the speed of light. Nothing has broken. The blob came closer between the two pictures, so the second flash had less far to travel and arrived early, and the interval between arrivals is not the interval between departures.

7 figures · part 3 on Velocity addition The same source, seen coming and seen going. The observed flux of a moving source, relative to the same source at rest, against the angle between its motion and the line of sight, on a logarithmic scale, at β = 0.5, β = 0.9, β = 0.99. The curves span 8.1e+1, 1.3e+5, 1.6e+9 between the approaching and receding directions, which is ((1+β)/(1−β))⁴ exactly. The fourth power comes from the one quantity every observer agrees about: the specific intensity divided by the cube of the frequency. Three powers of the Doppler factor come from that invariance and the fourth from integrating over frequency. Two consequences are worth reading off. A source seen side-on is fainter than the same source at rest, by γ⁴ — a factor of 2.5e+3 at the fastest speed drawn. And half the light arrives inside a cone of 60.0°, 25.8°, 8.1°, which for a fast source is one over γ.

The brightness that is not the same for everyone

A moving source is not merely shifted in colour. Its light is concentrated forwards, so the same lamp is enormously brighter seen coming than seen going — by the fourth power of one number, which for a jet at ninety-nine per cent of light speed is a factor of a thousand million. The reason is that only one combination of intensity and frequency is the same for every observer, and everything else follows from it.

6 figures · part 5 on Doppler A circumference that is more than 2π times the radius. The ratio of a rotating disc's measured circumference to 2π times its measured radius, against the speed of the rim, together with the rate of a clock carried on the rim. Rulers laid round the rim lie along their own direction of motion and are contracted; rulers laid along a radius lie across it and are not. So the circumference takes more of them than a stationary observer counts and the radius takes the same number, and the ratio is γ: 1.091 at β = 0.4, 1.400 at β = 0.7, 2.294 at β = 0.9. The geometry a rotating observer measures is therefore not Euclidean, and it is not Euclidean by an amount that depends on where on the disc the measurement is made. That is the observation Einstein said set him on the road to describing gravity with curved geometry: here is an accelerated frame, and here is a geometry in it that no choice of Cartesian coordinates can flatten. The rim's clock runs slow by the same factor, so a rotating frame has neither a common time nor a flat space.

The disc that cannot be spun

Set a disc turning and measure its circumference with rulers carried on the rim. They lie along their own direction of motion and are contracted, so more of them fit; rulers along a radius lie across the motion and are not. The ratio of circumference to radius is therefore not two pi, in a frame where nothing is happening but rotation — and Einstein said that was what set him looking for gravity in geometry.

5 figures · part 5 on Length contraction

Quantum

Where the continuous picture runs out, and what replaces it.

A current that falls by a decade for every ångström. Tunnelling current against the width of a vacuum gap, on a logarithmic scale, for three work functions covering the range of clean metal surfaces. The curves are straight because the transmission is an exponential in the gap, and their slopes are 0.833, 0.944, 1.044 decades per ångström — fitted to the drawn curves and agreeing with 2κ/ln 10 to a part in a million. At 4.5 electronvolts a change of ten picometres, a tenth of an atomic radius, changes the current by 24 per cent. That is the sensitivity a scanning tunnelling microscope lives on, and it is why the instrument measures height by holding the current fixed and recording what the piezo had to do: the current is far too steep a function of height to be read as one.

The last atom does all the seeing

A tunnelling rate falls by a factor of eight for every tenth of a nanometre of extra barrier, which is normally quoted as the reason nothing ever tunnels anywhere. Read the other way it is a microscope: the second-nearest atom of a blunt metal tip carries a two-hundredth of the current the nearest one does, so a tip nobody sharpened resolves a single atom, and the resolution comes from an exponential rather than from any piece of engineering.

5 figures · part 3 on Tunnelling 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.

5 figures · part 4 on Measurement

Fluids

Matter that will not hold a shape, and the forces that act in it anyway.

Two angles a film is not allowed to depart from. The two junctions Plateau's laws permit, drawn at the angles a balance of equal tensions requires. A soap film pulls equally in every direction along itself, so where films meet the pulls must sum to zero — and equal vectors summing to zero fixes the geometry completely. Three films can only meet along a line, at 120.0000° to one another, because three equal coplanar vectors sum to zero at 120° and at no other angle. Four such lines can only meet at a point, at 109.4712° — arccos(−1/3), the tetrahedral angle — for the same reason in three dimensions. Both numbers are found here by solving the balance rather than by drawing what is expected, and neither depends on the liquid, the temperature or the size of the foam. A junction of four films along a line, or of three lines at a point, is not merely unusual: the tensions cannot balance there, so it rearranges within milliseconds into the two arrangements drawn.

The angles a film has no choice about

A soap film pulls equally hard in every direction along itself, so wherever films meet the pulls have to sum to zero — and equal vectors summing to zero fixes the geometry completely. Three films meet at a hundred and twenty degrees and four edges at a hundred and nine point four seven, in every foam, of every liquid, at every scale, and nothing about the material appears in either number.

4 figures · part 6 on Surface tension The same liquid climbs a thin rod and is thrown off a thick one. The height of the free surface against distance from the axis, for rods of 10.0, 25.0, 60.0 millimetres radius turning at one revolution a second in the same polymer solution, with the Newtonian answer dashed. Two effects compete and they fall off at different rates: a hoop tension along the curved streamlines pulls the fluid inward and lifts it, falling as the fourth power of the distance, while the centrifugal term pushes it outward and lowers it, falling as the second. Near a thin rod the fourth power wins and the liquid climbs — 2.21 millimetres at the thinnest. Beyond a radius of 34.64 millimetres it does not, and the same fluid at the same speed is thrown outward exactly as water would be. The changeover is a property of the fluid and the rod together, so a demonstration that works on a glass stirring rod fails on a spoon handle.

The liquid that climbs the rod

Stir water with a rod and it is flung outward, leaving a dip at the centre. Stir a polymer solution and it climbs the rod instead. Nothing about the viscosity can produce that, however large it is made — what produces it is a second stress that appears in shear and has no Newtonian counterpart at all, growing as the square of the rate where the familiar one grows in proportion.

7 figures · part 4 on Rheology

Astrophysics

Gravity read as geometry, and the laws carried where no laboratory can follow.

Five rays, and the one that decides which side everything falls on. Light traced past a non-rotating mass at five impact parameters, by integrating the exact null geodesic rather than the weak-field formula. The shaded disc is the horizon and the dashed circle is the photon sphere at three masses. Rays passing closer than 5.196 masses are captured — 2 of the five here — and rays passing further escape, however far they are bent on the way. The two nearest the critical value behave in the most striking way: one wraps 1.06 times round before leaving and the other wraps round before falling in, and between them lies a ray that would circle for ever on the unstable orbit. Far away the same integration reproduces the familiar weak-field deflection: at sixty masses it gives 0.07021 radians against 4M/b = 0.06667, so the strong field and the weak one are one calculation.

The circle light cannot leave

A black hole has three radii and they are all sometimes called its size. The horizon is where nothing can come back from; the photon sphere, half again as far out, is where light can circle and cannot keep circling; and the shadow a distant observer sees is larger than either, because the ray that just escapes was bent on its way out.

7 figures · part 4 on Horizons A wave that dies with nothing to rub against. The electric field of a plasma wave at kλ = 0.5, against time in plasma periods, on a logarithmic scale, obtained by integrating the collisionless kinetic equation as an initial-value problem. There are no collisions in the equation, no viscosity and no resistance; the only operator acting on the distribution is a rotation of phase whose rate depends on the particle's speed. The field nevertheless falls exponentially, at 0.1534 per plasma period, against the published root of the kinetic dispersion relation at this wavenumber, 0.1534, and Landau's asymptotic formula's 0.1514. Meanwhile the free energy of the perturbation — the weighted norm of the distribution plus the field energy, which the equation conserves exactly — moves by 2.4e-10. So nothing has been dissipated: every joule the field loses is still in the distribution, and the accounting closes to a part in ten thousand million. The energy has gone into the particles' ordered motion, and the information about the wave is wound into structure at finer and finer scales in velocity.

The wave that dies with nothing to rub against

Every damping in this collection so far removes energy from a wave and puts it somewhere warmer. This one removes it and produces no heat at all: there are no collisions in the equation, the entropy is unchanged, the whole thing runs backwards perfectly, and the wave still dies exponentially. What it dies into is structure in velocity too fine for a field to see.

6 figures · part 4 on Plasma oscillation

Every field · every reading path · every object named · every figure · what is taught wrongly · search