Electromagnetic Scattering Theory: Johns APL Technical
Electromagnetic Scattering Theory: Johns APL Technical
Electromagnetic Scattering Theory: Johns APL Technical
FARRELL
trial field was carried out for a test surface. As illus- age to corneal cells. These studies of electromagnetic
trated in Fig. la, a rough surface is described by ver- interactions with biological tissue were surveyed recent-
tical deviation as a function of horizontal dimensions, ly in the Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest, 31 and
which includes height, slopes, curvatures, and higher extensions of the infrared studies are described in the
variations. A tractable test model for analysis is Ray- article by McCally et al. elsewhere in this issue. In an-
leigh's classic surface-scattering model, a circular other biomedical effort with the Johns Hopkins Med-
hemicylindrical boss on a perfectly conducting plane, ical Institutions, early APL vision research eventuated
as depicted in Fig. lb. For that model, all the vertical- in a general vector field theory of vision, considered
horizontal variation scales are represented just by the as the "scattering" process first defined and investigat-
boss radius, a. Thus a unique size/wavelength ratio ed by Maxwell: electromagnetic field absorptions at
parameterizes the model, viz., ka, where k = 27r/A the retina transmuting into a brightness-color spatio-
is the wavenumber of the incident radiation of wave- temporal sensation field. 32 ,33 Concomitant electro-
length A. More importantly, the model has a tracta- physiological studies with APL's Biomedical Programs
ble exact solution to which we may compare different Office suggested a novel electroretinographic analy-
approximate solutions. This is important because it is sis technique. 34
the only ironclad way to assess the accuracy of approx- Finally, various problems in electromagnetic induc-
imation methods. Such a comparison is displayed in tion that have concerned different departments of APL
Fig. Ic for the initial case we treated-backscatter of have been attacked via vector-field methods with con-
normally incident, horizontally polarized waves. One siderable success. Thus, analyses of hydro magnetism
sees from this graph (with the exact solution, curve induced by ocean motion across the geomagnetic field,
E, as benchmark) that the long-wave perturbation re- initiated for the SSBN security program, yielded many
sult (curve P) is satisfactory for small ka but fails badly useful numerical estimates, proved a new eddy the-
for ka ~ I, while the short-wave Kirchhoff result orem, identified the phenomenon of sonomagnetic
(curve K) may be acceptable for large ka but fails badly pseudowaves (hydro magnetic fields propagated via
at ka $ 2. In contrast, the variational result (curve acoustic radiation), and determined their scattering by
V) shows good agreement at all wavelengths, i.e., not the air-sea surface. 35 -38 For the Space Department, lev-
only from high frequencies into the transition region, itational force-torque in the magnetic suspension of
as hoped, but all the way through to the low-frequency the disturbance compensation system (DISCOS), now
(Rayleigh) limit. 28 (Other examples of this all- deployed in NOVA satellites, was analyzed to aid in
frequency variational improvement at different angles malfunction diagnosis and design optimization for
and polarization are shown in Figs. 6 and 7.) DISCOS. The power of vector field analysis is exem-
Although detailed analysis for this model over all plified by the fact that the analysis produced both sig-
polarizations and angles showed that the all-frequency nificant practical design simplification and new con-
improvement was not fully satisfactory, 30 these tributions to magnetic levitation theory. 39-41
studies encouraged subsequent attempts to design new
trial functions for accurate broadband scattering cal- STOCHASTIC VARIATIONAL PRINCIPLES
culations. 28 ,29 For perfect conductors, we modified General features of variational principles that make
the long-wavelength trial fields so that they became them invaluable as calculation tools are reviewed brief-
capable of satisfying the boundary conditions. At least ly in this section. The generic form of the Schwinger-
for simple test models, this approach has yielded ex- type variational principle is discussed, without mak-
tremely accurate all-frequency variational results. 29 ing explicit the integrals that compose it; these are giv-
(An example is displayed in Fig. 8.) Presently, in col- en in the next section. After pointing out the difficulty
laboration with the Space Department, similar meth- of applying the Schwinger form to stochastic scat-
ods are being tried on models for ocean surface radar terers, the APL-developed stochastic version of this
scatter. Future studies will be directed at surfaces with principle is presented and discussed.
arbitrary electromagnetic properties, where the fields Many physical problems can be expressed in terms
penetrate the surface. of a set of field functions, ir, that obey certain field
Most of this article will be devoted to elaborating equations. Often, primary interest is not so much in
on the SVP theory and its applications. However, we accurate calculations of ir, but in some related quan-
also present brief descriptions of some of the other tity, F(e.g., scattering cross section), that can be writ-
electromagnetic scattering research that the Group has ten as a functional of the field functions, F(ir) , in
done in collaboration with colleagues from other APL various ways. A particular functional is said to be a
departments or from other divisions of Johns Hop- variational principle if it is invariant for ir approach-
kins. In long-standing biomedical research collabora- =
ing the exact solution irE, i.e., if aF(ir) F(irE + air)
tion with the Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, a - F(irE) = 0 to first-order in small variations, air.
major eye corneal structure program has investigated When F is formulated such that the invariance (Eul-
both visible light scattering and infrared absorption er) equations reproduce the original field equations,
in the cornea. An intricate interplay between experi- aF = 0 represents a compact statement equivalent to
ment and theory led to the development of light scat- the original problem. Further, since the form of F is
tering as a tool to probe the ultrastructure of the chosen such that F(irE) represents a desired result in
cornea and yielded an explanation of infrared dam- the problem, the variational principle offers a power-
ful method of approximately calculating that result tegrand contains the fields and the Green's function
from reasonably accurate approximate values of the [G(r,r')] appropriate to the scattering problem.
field if. The variational method may be used either The form of Eq. 2 shows that variational invariance
to improve an existing approximation or to fashion is obtained at the extra cost of evaluating the integrals
efficient new trial approximations. In either case, by N2 and D, once the noninvariant solution N} is
virtue of the variational invariance, small errors in the known. Because ;j; is the solution to the adjoint prob-
trial functions for the field if lead to much (quadrati- lem in which ks +-+ -k;, it is convenient to use trial
cally) smaller errors in the calculated quantity, F. In- fields for the reciprocal problem, ;j;1, that are ob-
deed, judicious selection of trial fields if such that they tained from the trial field for the original problem,
can mimic exact behavior where important, viz., in F, 1/;1, also by the transformation ks +-+ -k;. In that case,
no matter how poorly they may behave elsewhere, will not only is it true that N2 (;j;) = N} (1/;), but also that
be seen to yield efficient and accurate approximations. N2(;j;/) = Nt (1/;/), so that the only additional cost of
An attractive form of variational principle is the invariance is to evaluate D. Several specific examples
Schwinger type, which is a ratio of functionals that of invariant formulations of scalar problems are giv-
is independent of the overall amplitude of the trial en in Ref. 1 (pp. 1128-1134), and a few are presented
function. For example, consider scalar wave problems in the next section.
consisting of a plane wave of amplitude A, frequency Vector wave (electromagnetic) scattering has a vari-
w, and wave vector k;, viz., A exp[i(k; -r - wt)], in- ational principle of the same generic form as Eq. 2,
teracting with a scatterer to produce a superposition with 1/; now the electromagnetic field represented by E:
of harmonic waves, say 1/;(r) exp(-iwt). The field dis-
tribution near the scatterer may be quite intricate, but
interest often centers on the far field (r ~ scatterer
size), where the scattered waves reduce to a spherical where T is any component of the vector scatter am-
wave whose amplitude varies with scattering direction plitude. The adjoint field E and the integrals Nt , N 2,
denoted by unit vector ks • Thus, the field 1/;(r) be- and D are identified in the next section. Here we only
comes asymptotically the sum of incident plane and note that the integrals are more complex than in the
scattered spherical fields, scalar case because their integrands involve dyadic
operations on the vector E,E field. Like the scalar wave
1/;(r) ::::: A exp(ik; -r) + T(ks ,k;) - A exp(ikr)/r , (1) principle (Eq. 2), the vector wave principle (Eq. 3) was
initially derived for deterministic scatterers in which
where k denotes wave vector magnitude Ik; I, and ks the scatterers have no element of randomness. Of
== k ks • The key ingredient in Eq. 1 is T, the relative course, there are important applications (such as sea
amplitude of the scattered wave, whose determination surface or chaff cloud scattering) in which the scat-
represents a complete solution for the far-field scat- tering system is necessarily treated as a random ensem-
tering. For example, the differential cross section is ble of scatterers (of sea waves or chaff particles), i.e.,
given by 1112. as a stochastic scatterer.
The Schwinger variational principle for scatter am- Stochastic scattering presented a seemingly insuper-
plitude T is obtained by considering the adjoint field able difficulty for the Schwinger-type variational prin-
distribution, ;j;(r), which describes the reciprocal prob- ciples (Eqs. 2 and 3). When a scatterer is characterized
lem of a plane wave with wave vector -ks scattering by randomness in its geometrical or material proper-
into the direction -k; (i.e., transforming ks +-+ -k; in ties, the quantity of interest is a statistical moment of
the original problem). As will be illustrated by the T or of the differential cross section, 1112. Even the
general vector derivation given in the next section, one first moment of Eqs. 2 and 3 involves averaging a quo-
way to derive Schwinger's expression is to use ;j; to tient of complicated integrals,
eliminate the incident amplitude A and thereby obtain
the homogeneous, symmetric variational principle for (4)
the scatter amplitude,
which is generally intractable and deterred application.
But this impasse is broken by the work at APL report-
ed in Ref. 12, which demonstrates that, for arbitrary
This functional TV of the field functions 1/;,;j; possess- scatterer statistics, the integrals Nt, N 2, and D in Eq.
es the valuable invariance properties discussed above 2 can be individually averaged and then recombined to
(identify if as 1/;,;j; and F as TV), provided the func- form an invariant ratio for the averaged amplitude.
tionals N} , N 2 , and D in Eq. 2 are appropriately de- Subsequent work at APL has extended this result to
fined. This will be seen in detail for the general vector the vector case, Eq. 3, and to all higher moments.
case in the next section, where N} , N 2 , and D are ex- 22,23,29 Thus, in lieu of Eq. 4 a general stochastic vari-
hibited to be integrals over the field distribution at the ational principle for mean amplitude is
scatterer. The integral N} (1/;) is proportional to a
known noninvariant expression for T, while N2 (;j;) is (5)
the analogous expression in the adjoint problem. The
denominator D(1/;,;j;) is a double integral whose in- in the sense that (T) v is exact when exact fields are
proof follows by manipulation 12,22 of the general re- where V is the scatterer volume and u(r) == k 2 (m 2 -
lations T = NI/47rA and D = N2 e A, which obtain 1), assuming m = 1 (i.e., u = 0) outside V, and, again,
in the derivation of deterministic Schwinger principles N2 (~) = NI (t/;). The scalar principle discussed in Ref.
(e.g., Eqs. 12 and 14 below). The SVP, Eq. 5, is in- 1 is sufficient for the geometries of simple test prob-
herently more tractable than Eq. 4, since evaluating lems, but practical applications will require the more
a quotient of averages is less difficult than evaluating general vector principle about to be discussed.
averages of quotients. A special case of Eq. 5 was given Scattering from an object or surface with general
passing notice (but with neither proof nor subsequent electric and magnetic properties (Fig. 2) is described
generalization or application) in an early rough-surface by the vector time-harmonic wave equation for the
scattering theory.9 Sample results of our SVP appli- electric field,
cations will be given shortly, but first we will outline
V x V x E - k 2E = BeE , (8)
the derivation and some important aspects of the
general vector variational principle.
where k is the wavenumber of an incoming plane wave
Ej = Aej exp(ik j er) of amplitude A, propagating in
VARIATIONAL EXPRESSIONS FOR
the direction k j with linear polarization ej, and the
GENERAL SCATTERING PROBLEMS dyadic operator 0 characterizes the geometric and ma-
The application of variational principles to scatter- terial properties of the scatterer. For notational sim-
ing problems requires explicit expressions for the in- plification, arguments of functions will be omitted
tegrals N 1 , N 2 , and D. This section presents these when no confusion can arise. The explicit form of
expressions for several cases and reviews the deriva- o e E for general inhomogeneous and anisotropic scat-
tion of the vector variational principle. These mathe- terers with tensor permeability II, permittivity E, and
matical considerations are the foundation for appli- conductivity (1, is
cations and for the analyses of test cases described in
the next section. The comparisons there between the BeE = DeE + V x [pe[V X E]] , (9)
exact and variational results for these test cases pro-
vide a measure of the potential utility of variational where, with I the unit dyadic,
methods. That section and all subsequent ones have
been written in such manner that they can be read with- U == k2[r + (47rilw)u - I] , (9a)
out an appreciation for the mathematical foundations
presented in this section.
es component of the scattered wave
Scalar wave scattering is applicable to acoustics and
I ncident wave
to electromagnetics with special geometries. As dis-
cussed in Ref. 1, scattering from a perfectly conduct-
ing cylinder leads to
E(r) = Ej(r) + i Vo
dV' Go (r,r') • [O(r') • E(r')] ,
(10)
N2 = r
JVo
dV (geE) e [e i exp(ik i er)], (15)
(17)
where the symbol P. V. implies a principal value when
the term in brackets in Eq. lOis integrated and L is
the depolarization tensor 44 appropriate to the exclud- the form advertised earlier in Eqs. 2 and 3. Compari-
ed volume used to define the principal value. The in- son of Eqs. 7 above with Eqs. 13, 15, and 16 shows
finite-space Green's dyadic reduces to the usual free the similar form, but more complex construction, of
space Green' s dyadic 42 if the field point r lies outside the NI , N 2 , and D here.
the source region Vo, since o(r - r') = 0, and the prin- The requirement that Eq. 17 be stationary with re-
cipal value designation is unnecessary in that event. The spect to variations about the exact fields E and E
form of the infinite-space Green's dyadic can be de- results in separate integral equations (the Euler equa-
rived by using the free-space Green's dyadic and tions) for E and E. (These equations assume that the
Green's vector theorem to derive an integral equation inverse, 0-1 , exists. 23) The variational requirement
for the field within the source region. The singular na- suggests the choice g ot,
= where the adjoint is ot
ture of V V (1 I Ir - r ' I) requires that the point r = r '
be excluded from the region to which Green's theorem
defined by 1dV E e [ot
eE] == 1dV [OeE] e E. The
Euler equation for E is Eq. 10. The equation for E
is applied. Removal of an infinitesimal region about is similar to Eq. 10 except that it describes a plane wave
r = r' yields the principal value integral, and the resul- e
of linear polarization s and amplitude A = D / NI
tant integral over the surface enclosing this excluded incident along -ks being scattered by an object char-
volume yields the Lo(r - r') term. 43,45
The component of the scattering amplitude pola- acterized by 0+. With these identifications, the field
e
rized along a direction s is obtained from the asymp- E is usually called the adjoint field. This reciprocity
totic form of Eq. 10 on letting r - 0 0 in Eq. 11, and relationship between E and E suggests that a similar
one finds relationship should be imposed on the trial approxi-
mations for these fields, which are used in perform-
1 ing variational calculations via Eq. 17.
-N (12)
47rA I The dyadic Green's function formalism was con-
venient for deriving the above vector variational ex-
pressions 22,23 and for discussing general properties of
the variational principle. However, evaluation of the
integral D defined in Eq. 16 requires the infinite-space
where as before k s = k k s with k s rsI lrs I, and we Green's dyadic Go within the source region where the
e e
have defined s such that s eks = 0 in the far field depolarization tensor term, Lo(r - r'), of Eq. 11 is non-
limit. The form of the scattering amplitude given in zero. Straightforward evaluation of this depolariza-
Eq. 12 is noninvariant, in the sense that first-order er- tion tensor and the corresponding principal value
rors made in approximating the field E in Eq. 13 lead integral proved to be difficult. To remedy this, we used
to first-order errors in the approximation for T. some results from Yaghjian 43 to reexpress D in terms
An invariant form for T is obtained by using proce- of the scalar Helmholtz Green's function G introduced
dures analogous to those employed by Levine and in Eq. 6 and the text following. The double volume
Schwinger 46 for the scalar case. In particular, a sec- integral in D then becomes 24
~
to be of the form
N2 CRee;) exp(ik i er) dS , (21)
So
(23)
D=~ So
dS K 0 ~
So
dS' GoK' , (22) to first order in v, the "packing density" or area frac-
tion of the plane occupied by the hemicylinders. In
where the surface integrals are over the scatterer sur- both cases the constant C in Eq. 23 is N times the cross
face So, K and K are the original and Adjoint surface section for an isolated hemicylinder. However, the pa-
currents, respectively, and in this case G is the reduced rameter Ci is equal to 2 for the perturbational approx-
form of Eq. 11 for r ¢ r'. This free-space dyadic imation and 4.08 for the variational result.
Green's function can be shown to be appropriate from
the limits taken in Green's theorem at the surface of
a perfect conductor. As a result, Din Eq. 22 is evalu-
ated by first performing the r' integration with r above
So and then letting r approach So to perform the r in-
tegration. I ,22 For two-dimensional systems, Eqs. 20
through 22 may be reduced to the scalar wave Eqs.
6 above.
STOCHASTIC VARIATIONAL TEST
APPLICATIONS
To assess the accuracy and efficacy of the SVP, we
have tested it on idealized random models that are
complex enough to exhibit cooperative phenomena Figure 3-Classic rough-surface scattering model: a stochas-
such as interference and multiple scattering, as well tic array of the Rayleigh surface elements of Fig. 1b.
iar cosine-squared behavior in scattering angle, Os used in noninvariant formulations. In any event, we
(measured from the forward direction), have seen that they were susceptible to vast improve-
ment via the SVP. Since our primary concern was to
test the SVP solutions against known exact solutions,
we gave no initial attention to other size-ranges or oth-
The Born approximation ignores the geometric polar- er trial functions. But, of course, realistic random scat-
izability of the cylinder in the transverse electric terers are characterized by ranges of particle dimen-
wave. 44 Thus, Eq. 25 disagrees with the single-scat- sions or roughness scales that may include or exceed
tering result, the wavelengths of interest. Hence, we have devoted
considerable subsequent study to the judicious selec-
tion or modification of trial functions, and to varia-
tional improvement of the Kirchhoff short-wave ap-
which is obtained by taking this geometric polariza- proximation appropriate to large size-parameters.
bility into account. A comparison with the exact so- These studies were mostly restricted to deterministic
lution to order v, systems, since the primary interest was in the spectral
behavior of the variational integrals (Nl , N 2 , and D)
that are the same in the deterministic Eqs. 2 and 3 as
in the SVP Eq. 5.
Our initial study 27 of trial functions treated a near-
shows that for m ~ 1 the multiple scattering effects ly transparent (m ~ 1) dielectric sphere, of size-
(through this order in JI) are given by parameter ka • (m - 1), via Eqs. 2 and 7, again with
2 the known exact solution available for comparison.
af,s = - [2/(m 2 + 1)]2 ( m - 1) For the simple approximation in which the incident
2
m + 1 plane wave is used as the trial function, the variation-
al total cross section was found to be accurate to 10
x 2ao v cos Os cos (Os - 2(3) , (28) percent up to ka(m - 1) ~ 0.8. Modifying the plane
wavenumber to that inside the sphere, mk, increased
this limit to ka(m - 1) ~ 1.2. Introducing an adjust-
to relative order (m 2 - 1)/24(m2 + 1), where {3 is the able wavenumber, exk, and determining ex variation-
angle the plane of the cylinder axes makes with the for- ally, raised the limit to ka(m - 1) ~ 1.6. Ultimately,
ward direction (Fig. 4). The variational improvement a nonplane (spherical lens) wave function was found
of the Born approximation has the form the most effective simple trial function tested, raising
the limit to ka(m - 1) ~ 4 (see Fig. 5). Indeed, rea-
sonably accurate near-forward scatter amplitudes were
obtained for ka(m - 1) as large as 10, which for m =
where the multiple scattering contribution (last term) 1.2 corresponds to a sphere radius of approximately
is found to be identical to the exact contribution (Eq. 8A.
28) to the same relative error. The higher order terms
of relative size (m 2 - 1)/24(m2 + 1) in both the ex-
act and variational multiple scattering contributions 4~----~----~------~----'-----~
are discussed and compared in Refs. 25 and 26. The
multiple scattering term arises entirely from the sur-
face integral term in Eq. 18. 3
In summary, comparison of the exact (Eq. 27) and
variational (Eq. 29) forms shows that the SVP correct-
ly accounts for the geometric polarizability of the
transverse electric wave (even using the Born trial field,
which does not); it shows further that, to lowest or-
der in the small parameter m 2 - 1, the SVP
reproduces the exact multiple scattering contribution.
VARIATIONAL TRIAL-FUNCTION
SELECTION
The tests so far described were limited to Rayleigh 2 3 4 5
scatterers, i.e., ones of small size compared to wave- ka(m - 1)
length. For such size-parameters, one generally expects Figure 5- Total scattering cross section (Utod for a dielec-
the plane-wave trial fields we adopted to be reason- tric sphere of radius a and refraction index m = 1.2 as a func-
tion of size parameter (ka(m - 1)). The variational result using
able first approximations, despite rather gross flaws the spherical lens trial function (colored curve) agrees with
(e.g., in Eqs. 23 and 25) and even total failures (cf. the exact solution (black curve) within 10 percent up to the
the Rayleigh transverse magnetic cylinder 30 ) when vertical bar.
3~--~----~---.--~-r----.----' 1.8
c 1.6
0
.';:;
u 1.4
2 Sl
e 1.2
<J)
u
Cl
c 1.0
..::
~
.....
co 0.8
~
"0
(1)
0.6
.~
ro
o E 0.4
0
z
0.2
1(/4 0.0
0.01 0.1 10 100
ka
o 2 4 6 8 10 12
E = E
inc
- E
inc
Iz= r • I(x,z) , (31)
ka
Figure 7-Same as Fig. 6, except with vertical polarization and the boundary condition E = 0 on Z t(x) is
(tranverse electric, B II axis).
guaranteed provided that fIx,t(x)] == 1. A simple
general form that satisfies this proviso homologously
Here l/; represents the magnetic field (H II axis), so the to Eq. 30 is I(x,z) = g[z - t(x)] with g(O) = 1. One
boundary condition is al/;Ian = 0 on So. This is iden- finds that in the variational integrals (Eq. 2) the para-
tically satisfied by Eq. 30, provided only that metric function, I, and its derivatives appear only via
al(P)lan lsQ = 1. We treatl(P) on So (i.e.,/(a» itself allazlr , which for the simple form indicated reduces
as a variatIOnal parameter and determine it by the sta- to g' (0). In that case, there results a completely para-
tionarity condition, a I1l 2 /al(a) = O. meter-independent variational scattering amplitude,
Figure 8 shows an example of the variational results which we have evaluated for a sinusoidal surface
for (normalized) cross section as a function of size- (again: known exact solution). This variational result
parameter ka. One sees excellent agreement with the has been shown analytically to be in precise agreement
exact solution for ka ranging over four orders of mag- with the exact solution in a variety of limiting cases-
nitude around unity. Similarly very accurate broad- including both low-frequency and high-frequency
band results were found for transverse magnetic waves, limits-even where the trial approximation gives quite
and also for isolated cylinders with either polarization, wrong noninvariant results. Numerical studies will
by using boundary-Born trial functions analogous to evaluate the solution for intermediate regimes of scat-
Eq. 30 but appropriate to the pertinent boundary con- tering parameters. If required, the variational results
ditions. 28 Thus, choosing simple trial functions that may be fine-tuned by noting that with a periodic sur-
are capable of satisfying the boundary conditions leads face, t(x) = t(x + A), the tuning function, allazlr ,
to excellent results for perfectly conducting cylindri- is likewise periodic and representable as a Fourier se-
cal scatterers, for radius to wavelength ratios, kaI27r, ries, the first term being just the constant g'(O). Of
ranging from very small to very large. course, if all terms of the series were retained, one ex-
Presently, trial function design for simple sea-sur- pects the exact solution. However, it is important to
face radar scattering models is under investigation in note that this is not the same as expanding the surface
collaboration with APL's Space Department. For ex- field in a complete set (e.g., Papas' early variational
ample, considering a one-dimensional, perfectly con- work 3 ) because the latter trial function takes no ac-
ducting corrugated surface, say z = t(x), we again use count of the boundary condition. Here it is built into
.....--'!:
-- """'-i - ,. _ BII -_-_ teristics of the sonomagnetic signal, as opposed to the
scalar sound pulse, since they could aid in locating an
unknown source.
In closing, it seems felicitous to remark our appli-
cation of vector-field-analytic methods to a quite dif-
ferent facet of electromagnetic theory: the mathema-
tical description of visual sensation. This has exercised
physicists from the founder of electromagnetic theory,
Maxwell, through the early vector mathematization (of
5~--~---'---------'--------1 both space and color) by Helmholtz and Grassman,
to the Riemannian geometrization (following Ein-
stein's general relativity) of color theory by Schrl>din-
ger. Thus, there is consensus that vision requires a vec-
4 tor theory, despite a period of confusion over just what
are the vector components-retinal photon absorp-
c
0
tions, or cortical brightness and color sensations. 32
Ii>
+-'
+-'
'0, Only recently, however, has the mathematical descrip-
co ~
~ 3 ~
tion evolved to incorporate spatiotemporal variations,
Cl...
Q)
thus by definition forming a vector field theory, which
0
Cl
!co we have accordingly analyzed as we did the wave-
-I Q)
z scattering theory above via a Green's function
description. 33
2 I bll < 10-4 'Y Maxwell devoted a great deal-by some measures,
a third-of his efforts to the analysis of vision. His
mature insights that "All vision is color vision ... ,"
and" ... essentially a mental science," 51 seemed lost
1L-____- L__-L__________ ________
~ ~
sound but also is transmitted into the (nearly) sound- for small-, fast-, or fine-scale fluctuations .£1Q ==
free air. Therein it is radiated to considerable distances Q - Qo about an ambient state Vo ,Qo. Notke that we
for high-power infrasonic sources, S, as seen in Fig. have denoted the Green's dyadic here by F, since in
22J. A. Krill and R. H. Andreo, "Vector Stochastic Variational Principles 38 J. F. Bird, "Sonomagnetic Pulses from Underwater Explosions and Im-
for Electromagnetic Wave Scattering," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. plosions," l. Acoust. Soc. Am. 67, 491-495 (1980).
AP-28, 770-776 (1980). 39 J. F. Bird, "Theory of Magnetic Levitation for Biaxial Systems," l. Appl.
23R. H. Andreo and J. A. Krill, "Vector Stochastic Variational Expressions Phys. 52, 578-588 (1981) .
for Scatterers with Dielectric, Conductive, and Magnetic Properties," l. 40 J. F. Bird, "Levitational End-Effects in a Cylindrical Magnetic Suspen-
Opt. Soc. Am. 71, 978-982 (1981). sion," l. Appl. Phys. 52, 6032-6040 (1981).
24J . A. Krill, R. H. Andreo, and R. A. Farrell, "A Computational Alter- 41 J. F. Bird, "Kinetic Torque and Dynamic Behavior in a Magnetic Levita-
native for Variational Expressions that Involve Dyadic Green Functions," tion Device," l. Appl. Phys. 53, 1326-1333 (1982).
IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. AP-30, 1003-1005 (1982). 42c. - T. Tai, Dyadic Green's Functions in Electromagnetic Theory, Intext,
25 J. A. Krill, R. H. Andreo, and R. A. Farrell, "Variational Calculations Scranton (1971).
of Electromagnetic Scattering from Two Randomly Separated Rayleigh 43 A. D. Yaghjian, "Electric Dyadic Green's Functions in the Source Re-
Dielectric Cylinders," l. Opt. Soc. Am. 73, 408-410 (1983). gion," Proc. IEEE 68, 248-263 (1980).
26 J. A. Krill, R. H. Andreo, and R. A. Farrell, Calculation Procedures for 44H. C. van de Hulst, Light Scattering by Small Particles, Dover, New York
Variational, Born, and Exact Solutionsfor Electromagnetic Scattering from (1981).
Two Randomly Separated Dielectric Rayleigh Cylinders, JHU I APL 45J . Van Bladel, "Some Remarks on Green's Dyadic for Infinite Space,"
TG 1344 (1983). IRE Trans. Antennas Propag. AP-9, 563-566 (1961).
27M. R. Feinstein and R. A. Farrell, "Trial Functions in Variational Ap- 46H . Levine and J . Schwinger, "On the Theory of Electromagnetic Wave
proximations to Long Wavelength Scattering," l. Opt. Soc. Am. 72, Diffraction by an Aperture in an Infinite Plane Conducting Screen,"
223-231 (1982). Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 3, 355-391 (1950).
28 J. A. Krill, J . F. Bird, and R. A. Farrell, "Trial Functions in Variational 47 V. Twersky, "Multiple Scattering of Radiation by an Arbitrary Planar
Calculations," in Proc. 1982 CSL Scientific Con! on Obscuration and Configuration of Parallel Cylinders and by Two Parallel Cylinders," l.
Aerosol Research, R. H. Kohl & Assoc., pp. 201-209, (1983). Appl. Phys. 23, 407-414 (1952).
29 J. A. Krill and R. A. Farrell, "The Development and Testing of a Stochas- 48G. Olaofe, "Scattering by Two Cylinders," Radio Sci. 5, 1351-1360 (1970).
tic Variational Principle for Electromagnetic Scattering," in Wave Prop- 49G. N. Watson, A Treatise on the Theory of Bessel Functions, 2nd ed.,
agation and Remote Sensing, Proc. URSI Commission F 1983 Symp., Cambridge University Press, New York (1966).
European Space Agency-ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, pp. 50V. L. Pisacane et aI., TIP-III DISCOS Study Group Report, JHU/APL
299-307 (1983). SDO-5592 (1980).
30 J. F. Bird, "Analysis of All-Frequency Variational Behavior of the Kirch- 51 J. C. Maxwell, "On Colour Vision," Scientific Papers, Vol. 11,267-279,
hoff Approximation for a Classic Surface-Scattering Model," l. Opt. Soc. Dover reprint (1890).
Am. A 2, 945-953 (1985). 52T. Caelli, W. Hoffman, and H. Lindman, "Subjective Lorentz Transfor-
31 R. A. Farrell, C. B. Bargeron, W. R. Green, and R. L. McCally, "Col- mations and the Perception of Motion," l. Opt. Soc. Am. 68,402-411
laborative Biomedical Research on Corneal Structure," Johns Hopkins (1978).
APL Tech. Dig. 4, 65-79 (1983).
32 R. W. Massof and J. F. Bird, "A General Zone Theory of Color and
Brightness Vision I. Basic Formulation," l. Opt. Soc. Am. 68,1465-1471 ACKNOWLEDGMENT -This work has been supported in part by the
(1978). Army, the Navy, the Strategic Defense Initiative Office, the National Aero-
33 J. F. Bird and R. W. Massof, "A General Zone Theory of Color and nautics and Space Administration, and the National Institutes of Health. We
Brightness Vision II. The Space-Time Field," l. Opt. Soc. Am. 68, are pleased to acknowledge a number of members of the Laboratory's staff
1471-1481 (1978). who made important contributions to the analyses that are reviewed in this
34 J. F. Bird, R. W. Flower, and G. H. Mowbray, "Analysis of the Retina article. They include: Robert W. Hart, Assistant Director for Research and
via High Frequency Electroretinography," Biophys. l. 29, 379-396 (1980). Exploratory Development; Jerry A. Krill and Matthew R. Feinstein, presently
35 J. F. Bird and H. Ko, Ocean Magnetics I. Fundamental Survey and Esti- in the Fleet Systems Department; David E. Freund of the Research Center;
mates of Induction Phenomena, JHU I APL TG 1315A (1977). Ernest P. Gray of the Space Department and members of the DISCOS Study
36 J. F. Bird, "Hydromagnetism Induced by Submerged Acoustic Sources: Group in that Department; Harvey W. Ko of the Submarine Technology
Sonomagnetic Pseudoradiation," l. Acoust. Soc. Am. 62, 1291-1296 Department; and Robert H. Andreo, who is no longer at APL. It is also a
(1977). pleasure to acknowledge collaboration on the color vision theory with Robert
37 J. F. Bird, "Hydromagnetic Perturbations Due to Localized Flows: An W. Massof of the Wilmer Institute of The Johns Hopkins University School
Eddy Theorem," Phys. Fluids 22, 585-586 (1979). of Medicine.
THE AUTHORS