Talk:Reciprocity (electromagnetic)

Someone with a book should fix up the verbal statement. --David R. Ingham 01:21, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately,I haven't found it in in any E&M text. I've checked in Purcell's, Electricity and Magnetism, Griffith's Introduction to Classical Electrodynamics, Jackson's Classical Electrodynamics, and Landau's Classical Theory of Fields, which is odd for a "general electromagnetic theorem" Prehaps someone with an electrical engineering text could find it, and recat it appropriately. Salsb 18:20, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Yes. I don't remember it from physics classes, or I might know the relation to time reversal invariance. The statement I was trying to remember was from an engineering book. --David R. Ingham 02:08, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

This may be related: http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/dual_photography/ (Dual Photography/Helmholtz reciprocity)


 * Note that the theorem is indeed in Landau's book. It also does not require time-reversal invariance.  Anyway, I independently wrote up an (I think) much more complete article at Lorentz reciprocity theorem and so I've redirected this article to there.  —Steven G. Johnson 20:33, 19 December 2005 (UTC)