Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

PerturbedHamster t1_jdy1ifc wrote

They aren't, unless you're talking about an electromagnetic wave in vacuum. For the case of a wave, the magnetic field comes from the changing electric field, and the electric field comes from the changing magnetic field. Maxwell's equations tell us then that the curl of E looks like the changing magnetic field, and the curl of B looks like the changing electric field. To (over)simplify the math, the curl of a thing is perpendicular to the thing, so that's why the magnetic and electric fields are perpendicular in a wave.

1

breckenridgeback t1_jdygypz wrote

> To (over)simplify the math, the curl of a thing is perpendicular to the thing

That is not true.

For example, if F is the vector field sin(x) i + 3 k, we have:

  • curl(F) = cos(x) k
  • F dot curl(F) = 3cos(x) != 0.

Nonzero dot product -> not perpendicular.

1

PerturbedHamster t1_jdz002w wrote

I know it's not true in general, that's why I said it's an oversimplification. Given we're explaining vector calculus to a five year old, though, I thought it would be OK. What is true, though, is that if a vector field only has a single component then the curl does have to be perpendicular to the field. That's what's going on with linearly polarized light, and why I didn't feel too bad about oversimplifying.

1