Transformation optics, curvature and beyond (Conference Presentation)

M. McCall
{"title":"Transformation optics, curvature and beyond (Conference Presentation)","authors":"M. McCall","doi":"10.1117/12.2230678","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although the transformation algorithm is very well established and implemented, some intriguing questions remain unanswered. 1) In what precise mathematical sense is the transformation optics algorithm ‘exact’? The invariance of Maxwell’s equations is well understood, but in what sense does the same principle not apply to acoustics (say)? 2) Even if the fields are transformed in a way that apparently mimic vacuum perfectly, it is easy to construct very simple examples where the impedance of the transformed medium is no longer isotropic and homogeneous. This would seem to imply a fundamental shortcoming in any claim that electromagnetic cloaking has been reduced to technology. 3) Transformations are known to exist that introduce a discrepancy between the Poynting vector and the wave-vector. Does this distinction carry any physical significance? We have worked extensively on understanding a commonality between transformation theories that operates at the level of rays – being interpreted as geodesics of an appropriate manifold. At this level we now understand that the *key* problem underlying all attempts to unify the transformational approach to disparate areas of physics is how to relate the transformation of the base metric (be it Euclidean for spatial transformation optics, or Minkowskian for spacetime transformation optics) to the medium parameters of a given physical domain (e.g. constitutive parameters for electromagnetism, bulk modulus and mass density for acoustics, diffusion constant and number density for diffusion physics). Another misconception we will seek to address is the notion of the relationship between transformation optics and curvature. Many have indicated that transformation optics evinces similarities with Einstein’s curvature of spacetime. Here we will show emphatically that transformation optics cannot induce curvature. Inducing curvature in an electromagnetic medium requires the equivalent of a gravitational source. We will propose a scheme that achieves this.","PeriodicalId":285152,"journal":{"name":"SPIE Photonics Europe","volume":"258 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SPIE Photonics Europe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2230678","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although the transformation algorithm is very well established and implemented, some intriguing questions remain unanswered. 1) In what precise mathematical sense is the transformation optics algorithm ‘exact’? The invariance of Maxwell’s equations is well understood, but in what sense does the same principle not apply to acoustics (say)? 2) Even if the fields are transformed in a way that apparently mimic vacuum perfectly, it is easy to construct very simple examples where the impedance of the transformed medium is no longer isotropic and homogeneous. This would seem to imply a fundamental shortcoming in any claim that electromagnetic cloaking has been reduced to technology. 3) Transformations are known to exist that introduce a discrepancy between the Poynting vector and the wave-vector. Does this distinction carry any physical significance? We have worked extensively on understanding a commonality between transformation theories that operates at the level of rays – being interpreted as geodesics of an appropriate manifold. At this level we now understand that the *key* problem underlying all attempts to unify the transformational approach to disparate areas of physics is how to relate the transformation of the base metric (be it Euclidean for spatial transformation optics, or Minkowskian for spacetime transformation optics) to the medium parameters of a given physical domain (e.g. constitutive parameters for electromagnetism, bulk modulus and mass density for acoustics, diffusion constant and number density for diffusion physics). Another misconception we will seek to address is the notion of the relationship between transformation optics and curvature. Many have indicated that transformation optics evinces similarities with Einstein’s curvature of spacetime. Here we will show emphatically that transformation optics cannot induce curvature. Inducing curvature in an electromagnetic medium requires the equivalent of a gravitational source. We will propose a scheme that achieves this.
变换光学,曲率及其他(会议报告)
虽然转换算法已经很好地建立和实现了,但是一些有趣的问题仍然没有得到解答。1)变换光学算法在什么精确的数学意义上是“精确的”?麦克斯韦方程组的不变性是很容易理解的,但在什么意义上,同样的原理不适用于声学(比如说)?2)即使磁场以一种明显完美地模拟真空的方式变换,也很容易构造非常简单的例子,其中变换后的介质的阻抗不再是各向同性和均匀的。这似乎意味着电磁隐身已经沦为技术的任何说法都存在一个根本性的缺陷。3)已知存在导致波印廷矢量和波矢量之间存在差异的变换。这种区别有任何物理意义吗?我们在理解变换理论之间的共性方面做了大量的工作,这些变换理论在射线水平上运行,被解释为一个适当流形的测地线。在这个层面上,我们现在了解到,所有尝试统一物理不同领域的变换方法的关键问题是如何将基本度规的变换(无论是空间变换光学的欧几里得变换,还是时空变换光学的闵可夫斯基变换)与给定物理域的介质参数(例如电磁学的本构参数,声学的体积模量和质量密度,扩散物理中的扩散常数和数密度)。我们要解决的另一个误解是变换光学和曲率之间关系的概念。许多人指出,变换光学与爱因斯坦的时空曲率有相似之处。这里我们将着重说明变换光学不能诱导曲率。在电磁介质中产生曲率需要引力源的等价物。我们将提出一个实现这一目标的方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信