Codex @codex  0

For static electric fields and magnetic fields, Ampère's law and $\mathbf{E}=-\nabla \varphi$ give $\mathcal{P}=\mathbf{E}\times \mathbf{H}=\varphi {\mathbf{J}}_f-\nabla \times (\varphi \mathbf{H})$. Stokes theorem on an oriented separating surface then giveswhere each perfect conductor crossing it has constant electric potential ${\varphi }_k$ and signed electric current $I_k$. The line term is absent for a closed surface and must vanish in the limiting sense at infinity for a noncompact surface. Under that condition the incoming Poynting flux equals terminal power. If the signed electric currents sum to zero, the result is independent of the reference for electric potential.

A closed rectangular perfect conductor cavity has discrete normal modes selected by zero tangential electric field at the walls. Each frequency has the displayed form. With all three indices positive there are two independent polarizations of an electromagnetic wave; modes with exactly one zero index have one, and those with two zero indices are absent. For example the $n=0$ family can have $E_z\propto \sin (\pi lx/L_x)\sin (\pi my/L_y)$, independent of $z$. It satisfies the wall conditions because $E_z$ is normal to the $z$ faces and tangential to the side walls. Omitting such zero-index families is harmless for leading bulk density of states, but changes the low-temperature physics of a thin cavity.

Take a straight hollow rectangular electromagnetic waveguide with vacuum interior $0<x<a$, $0<y<b$ and axis $z$, where $a>b>0$. Its four walls are ideal perfect conductors. The time-dependent Maxwell equations require zero tangential electric field and zero normal oscillating magnetic field at these walls. Real metal has finite electrical conductivity, so real guides lose electromagnetic energy by Joule heating; the perfect-wall model isolates confinement and wave dispersion from that loss.

The simplest propagating transverse electric mode of a rectangular waveguide is ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$. “Transverse electric” means $E_z=0$, not that the magnetic field is also wholly transverse. With real peak scale $E_0$, its complex amplitudes, including the common axial factor, can be writtenThe physical fields are the real parts after multiplication by $e^{-i\omega t}$. In particular, $E_y$ is zero at $x=0,a$, maximal at $x=a/2$, and independent of $y$. At $y=0,b$ it is normal to the metal, so it need not vanish there. The ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$ electric field crosses the narrow gap, while its strength varies across the broad dimension.

For an original example choose $a=30\mathrm{mm}$, $b=12\mathrm{mm}$ and $f=1.25f_c$, where $f_c=c/(2a)$. With $c=299792458m/s$, this givesHere ${\lambda }_0=c/f$ is vacuum wavelength and ${\lambda }_g=2\pi /\beta$ is guided wavelength. The next cutoff is ${\mathrm{TE}}_{20}$ at $2f_c$; ${\mathrm{TE}}_{01}$ starts at $(a/b)f_c=2.5f_c$. Thus only ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$ can propagate at the chosen frequency, although a source or discontinuity can additionally excite local evanescent waves. These are calculated values, not specifications or measurements of a commercial guide.

Superconductivity is a phase of matter that supports steady electric current with zero bulk electrical resistivity and exhibits the Meissner effect: equilibrium screening of a sufficiently weak, static magnetic field from the interior. It occurs below a material-dependent superconducting transition temperature, provided the electric current and applied magnetic field are also sufficiently small. ^[ref] Bulk expulsion means that a sample much thicker than its London penetration depth has an almost field-free interior; the magnetic field need not vanish at its surface. Conventional BCS theory explains superconductivity through correlated electrons forming Cooper pairs. ^[ref]

The two observations answer different questions. A resistance-versus-temperature experiment for superconductivity asks whether a steady electric current requires a measurable electric potential difference. A Field-cooled Meissner experiment asks whether a magnetic field already present in the material is expelled when it enters superconductivity. An ideal perfect conductor with zero electrical resistivity can preserve that pre-existing magnetic field; zero electrical resistance alone therefore does not establish the Meissner effect.

The usefulness follows directly from Joule heating, $P=I^{2}R$: maintaining a steady electric current through a segment with zero electrical resistance produces no resistive heating in that segment. This makes persistent electric currents attractive for producing steady magnetic fields. The beauty is that one phase has both a transport property and an equilibrium magnetic response, and the second cannot be inferred just by making an ordinary electrical resistance very small. The London equations encode this extra magnetic response. ^[ref]

Proceedings of the Royal Society A149,71–88. Original theoretical paper distinguishes the acceleration description of a perfect conductor from the additional magnetic relation motivated by superconducting field expulsion.

A transverse electric mode of a rectangular waveguide has $E_z=0$ while its axial magnetic field is generally nonzero. For time dependence $e^{-i\omega t}$ and axial dependence $e^{i\beta z}$, set $\Delta =(\omega /c{)}^2-{\beta }^2$. The Maxwell equations reconstruct the transverse components from $B_z$:The axial complex amplitude satisfies a transverse Helmholtz equation, $({\partial }_x^2+{\partial }_y^2+\Delta )B_z=0$. Zero tangential electric field at each perfect conductor wall becomes a Neumann boundary condition on $B_z$. Separation of variables givesThe index $m$ counts half-periods across $a$, and $n$ across $b$. Either index can vanish, allowing ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$; both cannot vanish. Indeed a spatially constant axial oscillating magnetic field would give nonzero changing magnetic flux through the cross-section, whereas the line integral of tangential electric field around its metal boundary is zero. The integral form of Faraday's law excludes this ${\mathrm{TE}}_{00}$ candidate. Dividing the reconstruction formulas by $\Delta =0$ would be invalid and cannot produce the separate transverse electromagnetic mode.

For $m=1,n=0$, choose $B_{\ast }=-i(\pi /a)E_0/\omega$. The formulas recover exactly the $E_y$, $B_x$ and $B_z$ in rectangular electromagnetic waveguide. In particular, the transverse magnetic field accompanies $B_z$ and ensures zero divergence; an oscillating longitudinal magnetic field on its own is not the guided solution.

A transverse electromagnetic mode has both electric field and magnetic field transverse to its propagation axis. An ideal two-conductor guide can support such a mode without a geometric waveguide cutoff frequency; an empty simply connected perfect conductor pipe cannot.

In a hollow rectangular electromagnetic waveguide with perfect conductor walls and axis $z$, a transverse magnetic polarization has $B_z=0$ and a nonzero longitudinal electric field $E_z$. The wall boundary conditions impose $E_z=0$ around the transverse rectangle. Separation of variables therefore gives $E_z=E_0\sin (n\pi x/a)\sin (m\pi y/b)e^{i(k_{z}z-\omega t)}$, with $n,m\ge 1$. Setting either index to zero makes the entire field vanish. Thus there is no ${\mathrm{TM}}_{n0}$ or ${\mathrm{TM}}_{0m}$ branch. The transverse eigenvalue is $k_{\perp }^2=(n\pi /a{)}^2+(m\pi /b{)}^2$, with dispersion relation ${\omega }^2/c^2=k_z^2+k_{\perp }^2$. This exclusion is specific to this geometry and these boundary conditions.