Question about Ampere's law in vacuum and in matter

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around deriving Ampere's law in different media, specifically the transition from Maxwell's equations in vacuum to those in matter. The user struggles to derive the equation for magnetic fields and current densities, noting that assumptions about material properties, such as the linear relationship between D and E, are crucial. They highlight that in cases where these assumptions do not hold, such as with non-linear or tensor permittivity, the standard Maxwell equations may not apply. The user concludes by identifying that the polarization current density can be included to resolve the issue, suggesting a more comprehensive approach to understanding electromagnetic behavior in various materials. This highlights the complexity of applying Maxwell's equations beyond ideal conditions.
Arham
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Hi

We can derive equation \nabla.D=\rho_f from equation \nabla.E=\rho/\epsilon_0. But what about Ampere's law? I tried to derive \nabla\times{H}=J_f+\partial{D}/\partial{t} from \nabla\times{B}=\mu_0J+\epsilon_0\mu_0\partial{E}/\partial{t} but I could not. This is strange because I thought that Maxwell's equations in vacuum are enough for studying electromagnetic field in any matter and that Maxwell's equations in matter are derivable from them.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
They are, if you add some assumptions about the material - D proportional (and parallel) to E and so on.
For materials where this is not true, I don't know.
 
\partial{D}/\partial{t}=\epsilon_0\partial{E}/\partial{t}+\partial{P}/\partial{t}. The second term is underivable from Ampere's law in vacuum.
 
Add the assumption that ##D \propto E##, and it works.

In general, this can be wrong, but I don't know if the regular Maxwell equations work there at all. If ##\epsilon_r## is a tensor (or nonlinear), things can get difficult.
 
Dear mfb,

I think I found the solution. \partial{P}/\partial{t} is some kind of current (bound charges are moving). So if we write total current density as J=J_f+\nabla\times{M}+J_p where J_p is polarization current density, we can solve the problem.
 
Last edited:
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...
Back
Top