International Journal of Infrared and Millimeter Waves, VoL 6, No.

3, t985

BREWSTER ANGLES FOR MAGNETIC MEDIA

C. Lee Giles* and Walter J. Wild**

Optical Sciences Center
Universityof Arizona
Tucson, A r i z o n a 85721

Received November 22, 1984

Brewster angles (angles for which there is no reflection

of an incident electromagnetic plane wave) will exist for
either incident polarization at a planar interface sepa-
rating two media provided that either or both of these
media are magnetic. Except at certain angles (normal and
grazing incidence) and specific material properties, a
Brewster angle cannot exist simultaneously for both inci-
dent polarizations, but always exists for one polarization
or the other for real values of permittivity and perme-
ability. The existence conditions for the Brewster angle
are readily formulated in terms of relative media permit-
tivity and permeability, or relative media refractive index
and electromagnetic impedance. When the ratio of perme-
abilities and permittivities is not unity, the Brewster
angle is no longer orthogonal to the transmitted beam
angle. From the viewpoint of the dipole oscillator model,
the contributions of the electric and magnetic dipoles are
such that they do not independently dominate the Brewster
angle existence; rather the ratio of media permittivities
and/or permeabilities determine when a Brewster angle may
exist.

*Present address: Naval Research Laboratory, Optical

Sciences Division, Washington, D.C. 20375.
**Also at IIT Research Institute, 10 W. 35th St., Chicago,
Illinois 60616

187

0195-9271/85/0300-0187504,50/0 zg 1985 Plenum Publishing CorporalJon

188 Giles and Wild

INTRODUCTION

Recently, interesting and unusual properties of the

r e f l e c t i o n a n d scattering of electromagnetic plane waves in
magnetic materials have been reported. It has been shown
that for a planar interface and the special case of equal
refractive indices for both magnetic media, the amplitude
reflection coefficient is constant, and independent of the
angle of incidence and incident polarization I . For the
scattering of a plane wave from a magnetic sphere, the
scattered wave can be zero for various scattering angles
for certain specific ratios of permittivity and permea-
bility. 2 This paper describes another interesting property
of nonabsorbing magnetic materials, the existence of a
Brewster angle (incident angle of total transmission or
zero reflection) for either incident polarization of an
electromagnetic plane wave. This variation of the Brewster
angle with polarization is not well-known. 3 This is
because most studies of the Fresnel reflection equations
begin with the assumption of unity permeability which is
true for the visible and infrared regions of the spectrum.
In the submillimeter to radio-frequency parts of the spec-
trum one cannot necessarily ignor the permeability; indeed,
the permeability may be complex.4,5, 6 For the case where
dielectrics are considered, most treatments which incor-
porate the permeability usually go no further than a simple
statement of derived equations (such as for the Brewster
angles) and there is no detailed discussion of the
influence of the permeability or the physical interpre-
tation. 7,8 We expect that some of the results discussed
here can be verified experimentally with materials such as
the Yttrium Iron Garnets. 6
We describe the material conditions that determine which
incident polarization has a Brewster angle and show that
the Brewster angle cannot exist simultaneously for both
incident polarizations, except at normal and grazing inci-
dence. We also show that whether or not the Brewster angle
exists for either polarization is determined by the
relative strengths of the ratios of permittivity and perme-
ability or ratios of refractive index and bulk impedance.
Further, in general the angle between the Brewster angle
and the transmitted wave deviates from 90 ~ whenever the
ratio of permittivities and permeabilities is different
from unity.

ANALYSIS
Brewster Angles for Magnetic Media t89

Consider the reflection and transmission of an incident

electromagnetic plane wave at a planar interface separating
two media, either or both of which m a y be magnetic. The
constitutive relation between the electric field E and its
displacement field D is linear, isotropic, homogeneous and
time-independent, i.e. D = EE where e is the medium permit-
tivity. By magnetic, we mean that the constitutive relation
between the magnetic field H and its induction field B is
linear, isotropic, homogeneous and time-independent, i.e. B
= pH where p is the medium permeability, we assume that
for either or both media the permeability p is not equal to
Po, the permeability of free space and that both e and p
are real and positive. Note that materials which closely
approximate such properties exist at specific frequencies
in the far infrared, millimeter, and microwave spectral
regions.

El ,F1 I E2F 2
\

!
B ~ \\, O2

PLANEOF
INCIDENCE

%L

Fig. I. Incident polarizations, media permittivities

and permeabilities, angles of incidence and refrac-
tion, and Brewster angle are defined.
190 Giles and Wild

The reflection coefficients for either p o l a r i z a t i o n are

easily derived. I0,11 We let r• and rll denote the electric
field reflection coefficients for the polarizations respec-
tively p e r p e n d i c u l a r and parallel to the plane of inci-
dence. See figure I for further clarification. Define el,
UI and e2, U 2 as the permittivity, p e r m e a b i l i t y pairs for
the incident and reflecting media. Further analysis is
simplified if we define dimensionless ratios for permit-
tivity and p e r m e a b i l i t y such that e = e2/~ I and U = U2/UI,
i.e. e is the ratio of p e r m i t t i v i t y of the reflecting
medium to the p e r m i t t i v i t y of the incident medium and simi-
larly for U. Now e and U are independent of the choice of
units and can be interpreted as the relative strengths of
the electric and magnetic dipole contributions of each
media. 12 The reflection coefficients have the form8:

(~) cos @I - cos 82

r• = (I)
({U/e) cos 81 + cos @2

cos 81 - ( ~ ) cos 82
rll = (2)
cos @I + (U~7~) cos 82

where 81 and 82 are the angles of incidence and refraction.

The value of the reflection angle 81 for which r• or rll is
zero is defined as the Brewster angle for that p o l a r i z a t i o n
(all polarizations thus denoted are for the electric field)
and will be defined as 81 or 811. Using Snell's law, sin 81
= e ~ sin @2, and setting equations (1) and (2) equal to
zero, we find the following expressions for the Brewster
angle:

polarization El : tan 2 81 = U (e-p) (3)

l-ep

polarization Ell : tan2 811 = E (pqe) (4)

I-EU

Another form expresses the Brewster angles in terms of the

relative refractive index m and relative bulk electromag-
netic impedance z, where m ~ ~ and z ~ ~ / ~ . ~quations
(3) and (4) may now be written as
Brewster Angles for Magnetic Media 191

1-Z 2
polarization E1 : tan 2 81 = m 2 (5)
I -m 2

m2 z2-I
polarization Ell : tan2 81t = -- (6)
z2 1-m 2

From these equations, certain special cases for the Brew-

ster angle are i m m e d i a t e l y obvious and reassuring. Equa-
tions (3) and (4) yield

le # I, H = 11 tan2 8jl = g
81 does not exist,

(7)
tan 2 8• = P
811 does not exist.

As is well-known, the Brewster angle for d i e l e c t r i c s (Pl =

P2 = P = 1)exists only for the p a r a l l e l p o l a r i z a t i o n . How-
ever, the a n a l o g o u s m a g n e t i c case (g = I) has a Brewster
angle only for the p e r p e n d i c u l a r p o l a r i z a t i o n . Inspection
of equations (5) and (6) s h o w that for z = I (impedance
matching), Brewster angles occur for both p o l a r i z a t i o n s at
normal incidence. For m = I (refractive index matching),
Brewster angles occur for both p o l a r i z a t i o n s at grazing
incidence. I However, the existence of the latter case is
d i f f i c u l t to show except in the limit of one r e f r a c t i v e
index a p p r o a c h i n g the other.
General c o n d i t i o n s for the existence of the Brewster
angle for either or b o t h p o l a r i z a t i o n s can be readily
d e r i v e d from equations (3) and (4) or equations (5) and (6)
by requiring the right side of these equations to be posi-
tive and real. From equations (3) and (4), we have the
following existence conditions:

81 exists if H ~ e > I/p or p ~ e ~ I/p,

(8)
BII exists if e > ~ > 1/e or e ~ ~ r I/e;

and from equations (5) and (6):

192 Giles and Wild

8• exists if [: i> ] ~ or [: ~ I]

(9)
8,} exists if [zm I> ] ~ or [: <111>

These inequalities are graphically portrayed as decision

regions in figures 2 and 3. Equations (8) and (9) show
that for real values of m and z or e and ~, a Brewster
angle always exists for one polarization. Note that many

Z)o

M. )IELECTRIC)
I L=I

0 i
E

Fig. 2. Decision regions are illustrated for Brew-

ster angles for different polarizations as determined
by the relative permittivity e and relative perme-
ability ~. The regions denoted by 81 define values
of e and ~ where the Brewster angle exists for the
electric field polarization perpendicular to the
plane of incidence. Similar regions denoted by 8{{
are for the parallel polarization. The solid lines
indicate where a Brewster angle exists for both
polarizations. The dielectric case is denoted by the
dotted line.
Brewster Angles for Magnetic Media 193

values of (el,e 2) and (~I,~2) could represent a single

p o i n t (c,~) in figure 2. A similar situation exists for
(m,z) in figure 3. In each figure, the dotted line repre-
sents the d i e l e c t r i c (~I = ~2 = U = I) case. A c t u a l l y U = I
does not mean that both m e d i a have to be d i e l e c t r i c s . In
fact, both m e d i a may be m a g n e t i c but their p e r m e a b i l i t i e s
m u s t be equal. These m a t e r i a l s are then m a g n e t i c a l l y equiv-
alent but e l e c t r i c a l l y dissimilar. A similar situation
occurs for e = I. In figure 3, the p o i n t m = z = I (both
media electromagnetically identical) has a B r e w s t e r angle

~ _ 0 o

0 I
m

Fig. 3. Decision regions are i l l u s t r a t e d for Brew-

ster angles for d i f f e r e n t p o l a r i z a t i o n s as d e t e r m i n e d
by the relative r e f r a c t i v e index m and relative
impedance z. The regions denoted by 81 define
values of m and z where the Brewster angle exists for
the electric field p o l a r i z a t i o n p e r p e n d i c u l a r to the
plane of incidence. Similar regions d e n o t e d by 8H
are for the p a r a l l e l p o l a r i z a t i o n . The solid lines
indicate where a B r e w s t e r angle exists for both
p o l a r i z a t i o n s . The d i e l e c t r i c case is denoted by the
dotted line.
194 Giles and Wild

for all angles. A similar p o i n t exists at e = ~ = I in

figure 2.
For both p o l a r i z a t i o n s the critical angle 8c is defined
by sin 0 c = m = e / ~ and exists if m < I or e~ ~ I. From
figures 2 and 3 we see that a c r i t i c a l angle can coexist
w i t h a Brewster angle p r o v i d i n g the above c o n d i t i o n s are
satisfied. From the d e f i n i t i o n of the c r i t i c a l and Brewster
angles, we have the relations:

tan 81 = {(1-~/e) tan @c

tan 811 = {(1-e/~) tan 0c .

Since the e x i s t a n c e c o n d i t i o n s for 81 and 8ff i m p l y that

respectively ~/e < I and e/~ < I, the Brewster angle is
always smaller than the critical angle.

DISCUSSION

With figures 2 and 3, we can i n t e r p r e t the m a t e r i a l con-

ditions which d e t e r m i n e the existence of a Brewster angle
for a particular polarization. Figure 3 implies that if
both the r e f r a c t i v e index and impedance of the r e f l e c t i n g
m e d i u m are j o i n t l y greater than or less than the refractive
index and i m p e d a n c e of the i n c i d e n t medium, the Brewster
angle exists only for the p e r p e n d i c u l a r p o l a r i z a t i o n . If,
on the other hand, the relative refractive index and the
relative i m p e d a n c e are not j o i n t l y greater than u n i t y or
less than unity, the Brewster angle exists only for the
parallel polarization. For the special cases of z = I and
m = I, the Brewster angle is r e s p e c t i v e l y at 8 = 0~ and 8 =
90 ~ for both p o l a r i z a t i o n s .
If we can d e s c r i b e the m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s of e and ~ to
be due primarily to the electric and m a g n e t i c dipole
moments, 12 figure 2 offers some unusual i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of
the existence conditions. The relative m a g n i t u d e s of the
e l e c t r i c or m a g n e t i c dipoles do not independently dominate
the Brewster angle existence, c o n t r a r y to what one m i g h t
expect. The s i t u a t i o n is more complicated. For example,
one c o n d i t i o n for the e x i s t e n c e of 81 is that the relative
m a g n e t i c dipole s t r e n g t h of the r e f l e c t i n g m e d i u m to the
i n c i d e n t m e d i u m is greater than the similar relative elec-
tric dipole strength, plus the a d d i t i o n a l c o n d i t i o n that
the p r o d u c t of the electric and magnetic dipole strengths
of the reflecting medium is greater than the similar
Brewster Angles for Magnetic Media 195

p r o d u c t for the i n c i d e n t medium. Replace greater by lesser

in the p r e c e d i n g a r g u m e n t and we have the other e x i s t e n c e
c o n d i t i o n for ~• C o n t r a s t this to a similar e x i s t e n c e
condition for Ell where the relative magnetic dipole
s t r e n g t h of the incident medium is also greater than the
relative e l e c t r i c dipole strengths but the d i p o l e strength
p r o d u c t of the r e f l e c t i n g m e d i u m is less than that of the
incident medium. In summary, the m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s that
d e t e r m i n e the e x i s t e n c e of a Brewster angle for an i n c i d e n t

E 1 (TE) :
Eli ( T ~ ) : ~ -

i\',\ I
i I
/ /
l!o o ;o /
~z~~ \ ~ iI ~176

#.
90 ~ - " ",,~ / / " (DIELECTRIC)

6o ~ / / ",, ~ ~ 12oL..._
./o{,, ', "~-..,8oo
~
60 %# .. 120 ~

Fig. 4. Curves of constant ~ ~ 8 + 82 are illus-

trated as a function of e and p. When either e = I
or p = I, we have the w e l l - k n o w n c o n d i t i o n e = 90 ~ .
If e = p (impedance m a t c h i n g ) , ~ = 8 = 0 ~ (Brewster's
angle at normal incidence); and if e = I/p (refrac-
tive index m a t c h i n g ) , e = 180 ~ (Brewster's angle at
g r a z i n g incidence).
196 Giles and Wild

p o l a r i z a t i o n are more complex that might be expected 9 But

simple i n e q u a l i t i e s b e t w e e n the relative p e r m i t t i v i t y and
the relative p e r m e a b i l i t y or between the relative refrac-
tive index and the relative impedance provide d e f i n i t i v e
e x i s t e n c e conditions.
It is also i n t e r e s t i n g to consider how the p e r m e a b i l i t y
changes the o r t h o g o n a l i t y c o n d i t i o n between the Brewster
angle and t r a n s m i t t e d beam angle, i.e., how does ~+82
b e h a v e (see figure I) for general e and ~? R e f e r r i n g to
e q u a t i o n s (3) and (4), we easily see that

polarization El : cos(~+@ 2) = {(~/e)

I-l~
(I0)
I-1-I
polarization Eli .- cos(8+@ 2) = ~(e/~)
1-e

Figure 4 i l l u s t r a t e s a family of curves of e E 8+82 for

v a r i a b l e e,~. We see that e = 90 ~ only when e = I or ~ = I.
These values of e will vary from 0 ~ to 180 ~ , d e p e n d i n g on
e and ~. For the case where e = ~ we have the Brewster
angle at normal incidence. 4 For the case where e = I/~
(discussed at length in reference I), the Brewster angle is
at extreme grazing incidence; this may be a singular situ-
ation if e1~ I < c2~ 2 (or e < I/~) since a c r i t i c a l angle
also exists--the Brewster angle always precedes the
c r i t i c a l angle but if e = I/~ each "coexists" at 81 = 8 =
90 ~ All curves pass through the p o i n t ~ = ~ = I; this is
not a p a t h o l o g i c a l situation, rather, no e l e c t r o m a g n e t i c
i n t e r f a c e exists for these m a t e r i a l parameters. Realizing
that m a g n e t i c dipoles will radiate the same as electric
dipoles, the c o n t r i b u t i o n of each (parameterized by ~ and
e) will lead to the results shown in figure 4. We should
also point out that for a n o n l i n e a r optical material
w h e r e b y e and/or ~ can be e l e c t r i c a l l y (or thermally) m o d u -
lated, a form of m i l l i m e t e r wave optical "switch" can be
devised. This, however, can only be realized if suitable
m a t e r i a l s can be located or fabricated.
We believe that this work will i n t e r e s t m i l l i m e t e r wave
researchers concerned with the d e v e l o p m e n t and c h a r a c t e r -
ization of m a g n e t i c materials. Further a p p l i c a t i o n s of
this and p r e v i o u s studies include interesting scattering
properties of m a g n e t i c a e r o s o l s for m i l l i m e t e r and FIR
lasers, and the a p p l i c a t i o n to Brewster angle m e a s u r e m e n t s
BrewsterAnglesforMagneticMedia ~97

for the determination of the optical properties of magnetic

media (similar to that for dielectrics in the visible). 2,8

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to acknowledge useful suggestions made by

A. Lohmann.

REFERENCES

I. C.L. Giles and W. J. Wild, "Fresnel reflection and

transmission at a planar boundary from media of equal
refractive indices," Appl. Phys. Lett. 40 (3), 210
(1982).
2. M. Kerker, D-S. Wang and C. L. Giles, "Electromagnetic
scattering by magnetic spheres," J. Opt. Soc. Am. 73,
765 (1983).
3. R. F. Harrington, Time-Harmonic Electromagnetic Fields
(McGraw-Hill, New York, 1961) p. 59.
4. G.T. Ruck, D.E. Barrick, W.D. Stuart, and C.K.
Kirchbaum, Radar Cross Section Handbook, (Plemum, New
York, 1970), p. 624.
5. A. Sommerfeld, Optics (Academic Press, New York, 1949)
p. 18.
6. B. Lax and K.J. Button, Microwave Ferrites and Ferri-
magnetics, (New York, McGraw-Hill, 1962) Chap. 7.
7. W . T . Doyle, "Graphical Approach to Fresnal's Equation
for Reflection and Refraction of Light," Am. J. Phys.,
48(8), 643 (1980).
8. M. Zahn, Electromagnetic Field Theory: A Problem
Solving Approach, (Wiley) p. 540, 2nd Ed. (1979).
9. R. Chiarelli, S. Faetti, and L. Frounaoui, "Determi-
nation of the Molecular Orientation at the Free Surface
of Liquid Crystals from Brewster Angle Measurements,"
Opt. Comm., 46 (I), 9 (1983).
10. E. Hecht and A. Zajac, Optics (Addison-Wesley,
Reading, 1979) p. 73.
11. R. K. Wagsness, Electromagnetic Fields 2nd Ed. (Wiley,
New York, 1975) pp. 464, 469.
12. M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics 5th Ed.
(Pergamon Press, New York, 1975) p. 84.