Magnetic Field Strength: Inverse Proportionality to Square or Cube?

AI Thread Summary
Magnetic field strength diminishes inversely proportional to the square of the distance for monopole fields, while dipole fields decrease with the cube of the distance. Monopoles do not exist, but certain conditions can create an approximate monopole field near a long bar magnet. For practical applications, a permanent magnet can be treated as a monopole when the distance to one pole is small enough that the effects of the opposite pole are negligible. The specific distance at which this occurs varies based on the intended use of the magnet. Understanding these principles is essential for accurate magnetic field analysis and application.
magnetics
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
I have read a number of journal article that state that magnetic field strength diminishes inversely proportional to the square of the distance. BUT more than one has stated that the field strength is inversely proportional to the cube of the distance from the surface of the magnet.
Which one is correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


It depends on the source of the field and how close you are to it.

A "monopole" field goes like 1/r^2. Magnetic monopoles don't actually exist as far as we know to date, but some situations can produce a field which is approximately a monopole field over a limited region. For example, if you have a long bar magnet and you stay close to one pole.

A "dipole" field goes like 1/r^3. This is what you get from a current loop or a bar magnet, when you get far enough away that it appears "small."
 


Thank you jtbell, that makes a lot of sense now. Could you possibly point me to a reference book/article that defines this?

Also in practical terms for a permanent magnet, say rare Earth with Max. Energy Product of 40MGOe how long would it have to be before it's capable of taking on the properties of a monopole at each end?
 


dont forget about the magnetic field of a single electron moving through empty space
 


magnetics said:
Thank you jtbell, that makes a lot of sense now. Could you possibly point me to a reference book/article that defines this?

Also in practical terms for a permanent magnet, say rare Earth with Max. Energy Product of 40MGOe how long would it have to be before it's capable of taking on the properties of a monopole at each end?

That tends to be a matter of practical application. To be treated as a monopole, one need only be so close to one pole that the effects from the opposite pole are "negligable." Where that threshold lies is up to the individual and usually dictated by the purpose for which the magnet is being used or examined.
 
This is from Griffiths' Electrodynamics, 3rd edition, page 352. I am trying to calculate the divergence of the Maxwell stress tensor. The tensor is given as ##T_{ij} =\epsilon_0 (E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} E^2)+\frac 1 {\mu_0}(B_iB_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} B^2)##. To make things easier, I just want to focus on the part with the electrical field, i.e. I want to find the divergence of ##E_{ij}=E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij}E^2##. In matrix form, this tensor should look like this...
Thread 'Applying the Gauss (1835) formula for force between 2 parallel DC currents'
Please can anyone either:- (1) point me to a derivation of the perpendicular force (Fy) between two very long parallel wires carrying steady currents utilising the formula of Gauss for the force F along the line r between 2 charges? Or alternatively (2) point out where I have gone wrong in my method? I am having problems with calculating the direction and magnitude of the force as expected from modern (Biot-Savart-Maxwell-Lorentz) formula. Here is my method and results so far:- This...

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
42
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
35
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Back
Top