<<

Coordinate Transformation & Invariance in

Steven G. Johnson, notes for the course 18.369 at MIT Created April 2007; updated March 10, 2010

It is a remarkable fact [1] that ’s equa- We will show that Maxwell’s take on tions under any coordinate transformation can the same form (1–4) in the primed coordinate be written in an identical “Cartesian” form, if system, with ∇ replaced by ∇0, if we make the simple transformations are applied to the ma- transformations: terials (ε and µ), the fields (E and H), and the sources (ρ and J). This result has numerous use- E0 = (J T )−1E, (6) ful and/or beautiful consequences, from designs of “invisibility cloaks” [2], to a simple derivation of PML absorbing boundaries [3], to enabling H0 = (J T )−1H, (7) analyses of bent and twisted waveguides in terms analogous to a Stark effect [4] , to pro- J εJ T viding a simple way of applying numerical meth- ε0 = , (8) ods designed for Cartesian coordinates to other det J coordinate systems [1]. Here, we review the proof in a compact form J µJ T (from [5]), generalized to arbitrary anisotropic µ0 = , (9) det J media. (Most previous derivations seem to have been for isotropic media in at least one coordi- nate frame [1], or for coordinate transformations J J J0 = , (10) with purely diagonal Jacobians J where Jii de- det J pends only on xi [3], or for constant affine coor- dinate transforms [6].) ρ ρ0 = , (11) det J Summary of the Result where J T is the . Maxwell’s equations in Cartesian coordinates Note that, even if we start out with isotropic are written (in natural units ε0 = µ0 = 1): materials (scalar ε and µ), after a coordinate ∂E transformation we in general obtain anisotropic ∇ × H = ε + J (1) 0 0 ∂t materials ( ε and µ ). ∂H For example, if x0 = sx for some scale factor ∇ × E = −µ (2) 0 0 ∂t s 6= 0, then ε = ε/s and µ = µ/s, which is pre- ∇ · (εE) = ρ (3) cisely the material scaling required to keep e.g. ∇ · (µH) = 0, (4) the eigenfrequencies fixed under a rescaling of a structure. Note also that if s = −1, i.e. a coordi- where J and ρ are the usual free current and nate inversion, then we set E0 = −E, H0 = −H, densities, respectively, and ε(x) and µ(x) ε0 = −ε and µ0 = −µ, and the system switches are the 3 × 3 relative and perme- “handed-ness” (flipping the sign of the refractive ability tensors, respectively. Now, suppose that index). [A more common alternative choice in we make some (differentiable) coordinate trans- that case would be to set H0 = H, transform- formation x 7→ x0 (usually chosen to be non- ing H as a pseudovector [7], while keeping ε and singular, with some exceptions [2]). Let J de- µ unchanged. This corresponds to sprinkling a note the 3 × 3 Jacobian : few factors of sign(det J ) in the above equations, 0 ∂xi which we are free to do as long as the sign is con- Jij = . (5) ∂xj stant.]

1 Proof coordinates is also straightforward. Gauss’ Law, eq. (3), becomes We will proceed in index notation, employing 0 0 the Einstein convention whereby repeated in- ρ = ∂aεabEb = Jia∂iεabJjbEj dices are summed over. Eq. (1) is now expressed: 0 −1 0 0 = Jia∂i(det J )Jak εkjEj ∂E 0 0 0 −1 0 0 d = (det J )∂iεijEj + (∂aJak det J )εkjEj ∂aHbabc = εcd + Jc (12) ∂t 0 0 0 = (det J )∂iεijEj, (21) where abc is the usual Levi-Civita permutation which gives ∇0 · (ε0E0) = ρ0 for ρ0 = ρ/ det J , and ∂a = ∂/∂xa. Under a coordinate 0 0 ∂xa corresponding to eq. (11). Similarly for eq. (4). change x 7→ x , if we let Jab = be the ∂xb Here, we have used the fact that (non-singular) Jacobian matrix associated with the coordinate transform (which may be a func- −1 ∂aJak det J = ∂aanmkijJinJjm/2 = 0, (22) tion of x), we have from the cofactor formula for the matrix inverse, ∂ = J ∂0 . (13) a ba b and recalling that ∂aJjbabc = 0 from above. In particular, note that ρ = 0 ⇐⇒ ρ0 = 0 and Furthermore, as in eqs. (6–7), let J = 0 ⇐⇒ J0 = 0, so a non-singular coordinate 0 transformation preserves the absence (or pres- Ea = JbaEb, (14) 0 ence) of sources.d Ha = JbaHb. (15) Hence, eq. (12) becomes References 0 0 0 ∂El Jia∂iJjbHjabc = εcdJld + Jc. (16) [1] A. J. Ward and J. B. Pendry, “Refraction and ∂t geometry in Maxwell’s equations,” J. Modern 0 Here, the Jia∂i = ∂a derivative falls on both , vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 773–793, 1996. the J and H0 terms, but we can eliminate the jb j [2] J. B. Pendry, D. Schurig, and D. R. Smith, former thanks to the  : ∂ J  = 0 because abc a jb abc “Controlling electromagnetic fields,” , ∂ J = ∂ J . Then, again multiplying both a jb b ja vol. 312, pp. 1780–1782, 2006. sides by the Jacobian Jkc, we obtain [3] F. L. Teixeira and W. C. Chew, “Gen- ∂E0 J J J ∂0H0  = J ε J l + J J eral closed-form PML constitutive tensors to kc jb ia i j abc kc cd ld ∂t kc c (17) match arbitrary bianisotropic and dispersive linear media,” IEEE and Guided Noting that JiaJjbJkcabc = ijk det J by defi- nition of the determinant, we finally have Wave Lett., vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 223–225, 1998.

0 [4] S. G. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. Skorobo- 0 0 1 ∂El JkcJc ∂ H ijk = JkcεcdJld + (18) gatiy, O. Weisberg, T. D. Engeness, M. Sol- i j det J ∂t det J jačić, S. A. Jacobs, J. D. Joannopoulos, or, back in vector notation, and Y. Fink, “Low-loss asymptotically single- mode propagation in large-core OmniGu- J εJ T ∂E0 ∇0 × H0 = + J0, (19) ide fibers,” Optics Express, vol. 9, no. 13, det J ∂t pp. 748–779, 2001. 0 where J = J J/ det J according to (10). Thus, [5] C. Kottke, A. Farjadpour, and S. G. Johnson, we see that we can interpret ’s Law in “Perturbation theory for anisotropic dielec- arbitrary coordinates as the usual in tric interfaces, and application to sub-pixel Euclidean coordinates, as long as we replace the smoothing of discretized numerical meth- materials etc. by eqs. (6–8). By an identical ods,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 77, p. 036611, 2008. argument, we obtain [6] I. V. Lindell, Methods for Electromagnetic J µJ T ∂H0 Fields Analysis. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford Univ. ∇0 × E0 = − , (20) det J ∂t Press, 1992. which yields the transformation (9) for µ. [7] J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics. The transformation of the remaining diver- New York: Wiley, third ed., 1998. gence equations into equivalent forms in the new

2