Re: POLARIZATION

[John Mallinckrodt <ajmallinckro@CSUPomona.Edu>]

On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, brian whatcott wrote:

> " Here's a weak, quantum argument:
> " 
> " A linear wave has twice the amplitude of its two component helical waves.
> " A helical wave has the same amplitude as its component linear waves.
> " In the limit, smaller helical waves are permitted than linear waves. QED

Setting aside the question of whether or not there is any quantum 
mechanical sense to be made of the above (which Leigh has already 
addressed), I'd simply point out that the proposition itself is 
at best misleading.

The *rms* amplitude (i.e., the only one that "really matters") of 
a transverse wave is always sqrt(2) times larger than that of its 
two equal amplitude component waves whether the wave is linear and 
the components helical or vice-versa.  This is a simple 
mathematical result and it (reassuringly) agrees with the dictum 
of conservation of energy since the intensity of a wave is 
proportional to the mean square amplitude.

John
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 A. John Mallinckrodt      http://www.intranet.csupomona.edu/~ajm
 Professor of Physics    mailto:ajmallinckro@csupomona.edu
 Physics Department       voice:909-869-4054
 Cal Poly Pomona            fax:909-869-5090
 Pomona, CA 91768-4031   office:Building 8, Room 223