Differential Form Approach to the Analysis of Electromagnetic Cloaking and Masking

Transcription

1 MOTL DRAFT 1 Differential Form Approach to the Analysis of Electromagnetic Cloaking and Masking F. L. Teixeira Abstract We bring attention to the relationship between (1) electromagnetic masking or cloaking of objects produced by some metamaterial blueprints and (2) some invariances of Maxwell equations obviated by means of the differential forms (exterior calculus) framework. I. INTRODUCTION It has been recently shown that it is in principle possible to achieve (under certain idealized conditions) electromagnetic cloaking of objects by using metamaterial coatings with properly designed constitutive parameters [1]. The basic feature underlying this remarkable possibility is the invariance of Maxwell equations under diffeomorphisms of the metric (metric invariance) [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], i.e., the fact that a change on the metric of space can be mimicked by a proper change of the constitutive tensors. In this work, we discuss how this feature of Maxwell equations is obviated using differential forms and the exterior calculus framework [3], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]. We then illustrate how this feature also allows for generic masking of objects (again, under idealized conditions) via appropriate metamaterial coatings. II. MAXWELL EQUATIONS AND DIFFERENTIAL FORMS In terms of differential forms, Maxwell equations in four-dimensional spacetime write in a very concise manner as [6] df = 0 d F = J (1) where d is the four-dimensional exterior derivative, F is the electromagnetic strength 2-form, J is the source density 3-form, and is the four-dimensional Hodge star operator. By performing a splitting and treating time as a parameter, we can write F in terms of the electric field intensity 1-form E and the magnetic flux density 2-form B, and write J in terms of the (electric) current density 2-form J and the (electric) charge density 3-form ρ as F = E dt + B, J = ρ J dt. (2) In the above, d is the three-dimensional (spatial) exterior derivative, and is the exterior product. The exterior derivatives d and d are both metric-free and nilpotent, and related through d = d + dt. It is interesting to note that the nilpotency of d implies dj = 0, a statement of charge conservation. On each spatial slice, three-dimensional (spatial) Hodge star operators ǫ and µ can be defined such that [9], [10] B = µ H, D = ǫ E, (3) Manuscript received MM DD, YYYY; revised MM DD, YYYY. This work was supported in part by NSF under grant ECS and by AFOSR under grant FA F. L. Teixeira is with ElectroScience Laboratory and Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. teixeira.5@osu.edu

2 MOTL DRAFT 2 where D is the electric flux density (twisted) 2-form, and H is the magnetic field intensity (twisted) 1-form. In terms of ǫ and µ, the four-dimensional Hodge can be written as From df = 0, we obtain and hence G = F = 1 µ B dt + ǫe = H dt + D. (d + dt )(B + E dt) = 0, db + (de + B ) dt = 0. (4) Moreover, from dg = d F = J, we have and hence (d + dt )(D H dt) = ρ J dt, (dd ρ) + (J dh + D ) dt = 0 (5) From (4) and (5), Maxwell equations in dimensions can be decomposed as [5] de = B, db = 0, dh = D + J, dd = ρ, (6) where the only spatial operator present is d. When applied to 0-, 1-, or 2-forms, respectively, d is equivalent to the more familiar grad, curl, and div operators of vector calculus, distilled from their metric structure. Indeed, since d is metric-free, none of the equations in (6) depend on the metric of space (i.e., they are invariant under diffeomorphisms) [5]. All metric information is incorporated into the spatial-slice constitutive equations (3) that map 1-forms into 2-forms in 3-space [more generally, Hodge operators map p-forms into (n p)-forms in n-space] together with the material properties. III. DIFFEOMORPHISMS ON THE METRIC OF SPACE Under a differentiable but otherwise generic transformation (diffeomorphism) on the metric of space, the spatial-slice constitutive equations transform to g g, B = µ H, D = ǫ E. (7) In other words, by using differential forms, a change on the metric is manifestly equivalent to a change on the material properties of the medium, now encoded by ǫ and µ. This is to say that, for a given (doubly anisotropic, for generality) medium with constitutive tensors [ǫ] and [µ], either one of the transformations ([ǫ],[µ],g) ([ǫ],[µ], g) ([ǫ],[µ],g) ([ ǫ],[ µ],g) (8) where [ ǫ] and [ µ] are new particular constitutive tensors, produce the same differential form solutions, as illustrated by the diagram in Fig. 1. In terms of vector fields, either of these two transformations produce the same field distributions outside the region affected by the diffeomorphism g g and up to a scale factor inside that region [15]. More specifically, an arbitrary diffeomorphism on the metric g g can be described by a differentiable coordinate transformation (u 1,u 2,u 3 ) (ũ 1,ũ 2,ũ 3 ) with [S] as the Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives, S ij = u i / ũ j.

3 MOTL DRAFT 3 For an original medium with constitutive tensors [ǫ] and [µ], this transformation on the metric produces identical differential form solutions as those resulting from the following transformation on the constitutive tensors [15], [16] [ ǫ] = (det[s]) 1 [S] [ǫ] [S] T, [ µ] = (det[s]) 1 [S] [µ] [S] T, (9) since the same Hodge operators ǫ and µ are recovered. The differentiability of the coordinate transformation implies continuity of [S]. This in turns implies that the intrinsic impedance is not changed, akin to a PML transformation [15]. Fig. 1. Decomposition of 3+1 Maxwell equations into a topological part (top four equations) and a metric part (boxed equations), obviated by using differential forms. Under diffeomorphisms, the metric tensor g gets mapped to g. This can be translated to a modification in the Hodge operators ǫ and µ, which can be made equivalent to a change on the (spatial-slice) constitutive properties of the underlying medium: [ǫ] [ ǫ] and [µ] [ µ]. IV. HODGE OPERATORS AND MASKING BLUEPRINTS Using the above properties, metamaterial blueprints that produce electromagnetic masking of objects can be derived in a systematic fashion. The term masking denotes here the use of a metamaterial blueprint for coating a physical scatterer S 0 so that the resulting scattered field (from the coated object) becomes identical to that from a different (non-coated) scatterer S 1 (mask). In the case of a zero volume mask, masking recovers cloaking [1]. This is illustrated in Fig. 2. One example of such masking where a closed-form expression for the final metamaterial blueprints has been derived in [17]. In that case, a convex PEC object S 0 with surface radii of curvature in the range r [r m,r M ], with r M r m, is coated by a metamaterial blueprint of uniform thickness δ such that the resulting scattered field becomes identical to that of a (noncoated) PEC S 1 in a isotropic medium with constitutive parameters ǫ and µ having radii of curvature in the range r [0,r M r m ]. At any point p at the boundary of S 0, one can define orthonormal vectors û 1, û 2, ˆn, where û 1 and û 2 are tangent along the principal lines of curvature, and ˆn = û 1 û 2 is outward normal. The local tangential coordinates are denoted as ζ 1, ζ 2 and the normal coordinate is η, with η = 0 parametrizing the surface of S 0 itself. If the principal radii of curvature at p are given by r s1 and r s2, then at a point p along η for fixed (ζ 1,ζ 2 ), the radii of curvature of parallel surfaces are r i (ζ 1,ζ 2,η) = r si (ζ 1,ζ 2 ) + η, i = 1,2. In particular, the radii of curvature at a point p on the surface of the mask S 1 are r 0i (ζ 1,ζ 2 ), i = 1,2, with r 0i (ζ 1,ζ 2 ) = r si (ζ 1,ζ 2 ) r m, and r m = min p [r s1 (p),r s2 (p)]. The required diffeomorphism on the metric for this case is represented by the map M : η [ r m,δ] η [0,δ], η = M(η) = δ(r m + η)/(r m + δ) (for η > δ,

4 MOTL DRAFT 4 Fig. 2. By coating an arbitrary PEC scatterer S 0 (at the left) with a properly designed masking metamaterial the scattered field becomes equal to that of a (mask) object S 1 (at the right) in the region outside the dashed curve. If the mask is a zero volume object, cloaking is produced. we have η = η) [17]. The metamaterial coating that results is a inhomogeneous and anisotropic material blueprint with constitutive tensors [ ǫ] = ǫ[λ], [ µ] = µ[λ] where [Λ](ζ 1,ζ 2,η) = û 1 û 1 1 s η h1 h 2 h 1 h2 + û 2 û 2 1 s η h 1 h2 h 1 h 2 + ˆnˆn s η h 1 h 2 h 1 h2, (10) where h i = rsi 1 (r si+η) and h i = rsi 1 (r si+ η), i = 1,2, and s η = η/ η = δ/(r m +δ) [17]. The derivation of this metamaterial blueprint has close analogy with the derivation of Maxwellian perfectly matched layers (PMLs) for conformal boundaries [18]. This is because the latter can be derived in the various coordinate systems by applying a complex coordinate stretching (i.e., complexification on the metric of space) and the above metric invariance [10], [18]. As another example, conformal maps [19] are a class of diffeomorphic maps that preserve both orthogonality of coordinates and isotropy of the (transformed) constitutive parameters. In this case, g g = Ω(u)g, such that Ω(u) is a strictly positive scalar function of position. In an orthogonal system (u 1,u 2,u 3 ) it then follows that S ij = δ ij / Ω (where δ ij is the Kronecker delta). Using (9), one can then write: [ ǫ] = Ω [ǫ], [ µ] = Ω [µ]. (11) V. CONCLUSIONS We have used the differential forms (exterior calculus) framework to provide an unified analysis of the derivation of metamaterial blueprints for cloaking and masking of electromagnetic scatterers. Differential forms are quite suited for this purpose because they factorize Maxwell equations into a metric part and a (purely) tological part, and hence obviate the invariance of topological part under diffeomorphisms on the metric of space. The discussion has been restricted to the material blueprint level only [20]. Issues about the realizability and limitations on manufacturability of such metamaterials have not been addressed here. This is touched upon elsewhere [1], [20]. The realization and experimental evaluation of approximate cloaks have been considered in [21]. REFERENCES [1] J. B. Pendry, D. Schurig, and D. R. Smith Controlling electromagnetic fields, Science, vol. 312, pp , Jun [2] D. Van Dantzig, The fundamental equations of electromagnetism, independent of metrical geometry, Proc. Cambridge Phil. Soc., vol. 30, pp , [3] G. Deschamps, Electromagnetics and differential forms, Proc. IEEE, vol. 69, no. 6, pp , June [4] A. J. Ward and J. B. Pendry, Refraction and geometry in Maxwell s equations, J. Mod. Opt, vol. 43, pp , [5] F. L. Teixeira and W. C. Chew, Lattice electromagnetic theory from a topological viewpoint, J. Math. Phys., vol. 40, no. 1, pp , [6] K.S.Thorne, C. W. Misner, and J. A. Wheeler, Gravitation, Freeman, San Fransisco, 1973.

5 MOTL DRAFT 5 [7] C. V. Westenholz, Differential Forms in Mathematical Physics, Elsevier Science, North-Holland, [8] P. R. Kotiuga, Helicity functionals and metric invariance in three dimensions, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 25, no. 4, pp , Jul [9] K. F. Warnick and D. V. Arnold, Green forms for anisotropic, inhomogeneous media, J. Electromagn. Waves Applicat., vol. 11, pp , [10] F. L. Teixeira and W. C. Chew, Differential forms, metrics, and the reflectionless absorption of electromagnetic waves, J. Electromagn. Waves Appl., vol. 13, no. 5, pp , [11] A. Bossavit, Generalized finite differences in computational electromagnetics, in Geometric Methods for Computational Electromagnetics (F. L. Teixeira, ed.), PIER 32, EMW Publishing, Cambridge, Mass., pp , [12] F. W. Hehl and Yu. N. Obukhov, Foundations of Classical Electrodynamics: Charge, Flux, and Metric, Birkhauser, Boston, [13] P. W. Gross and P. R. Kotiuga, Electromagnetic Theory and Computations: A Topological Apporach, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, [14] B. He and F. L. Teixeira, On the degrees of freedom of lattice electrodynamics, Phys. Lett. A 336, pp. 1-7, [15] F. L. Teixeira and W. C. Chew, General closed-form PML constitutive tensors to match arbitrary bianisotropic and dispersive linear media, IEEE Microwave and Guided Wave Letters, vol. 8, no. 6, pp , [16] G. W. Milton, M. Briane, and J. R. Wills, On cloaking for elasticity and physical equations with a transformation invariant form, New J. Phys., vol. 8, 248, [17] F. L. Teixeira, Closed-form metamaterial blueprints for electromagnetic masking of arbitrarily shaped convex PEC objects, IEEE Antennas Wireless Propagat. Lett., vol. 6, 2007 (to appear). [18] F. L. Teixeira and W. C. Chew, Analytical derivation of a conformal perfectly matched absorber for electromagnetic waves, Microwave Opt. Technol. Lett., vol. 17, no. 4, pp , [19] C. N. Yang, Conformal mapping of gauge fields, Phys. Rev. D, vol. 16, no. 2, pp , [20] F. L. Teixeira, On aspects of the physical realizability of perfectly matched absorbers for electromagnetic waves, Radio Sci., vol. 38, no. 2, 8014, [21] D. Schurig, J. J. Mock, B. J. Justice, S. A. Cummer, J. B. Pendry, A. F. Starr, and D. R. Smith, Metamaterial electromagnetic cloak at microwave frequencies, Science, vol. 314, no. 5801, pp