Register to reply 
Biot–Savart law: the origin of chirality? 
Share this thread: 
#1
Jul1514, 07:20 AM

P: 112

As we know BiotSavart law follows righthand rule, like this:
...so the question is why righthand rule, why not left? I suppose it must have something to do with electron's magnetic dipole moment or "spin", as that's the only source of asymmetry I am aware of in this scenario. It follows then the orientation of the spin axis could be what defines this magnetic rotational direction, which would imply then the spin axis orientation is defined by the velocity vector. But still, the question remains, how or why could velocity vector have any specific directional impact on either intrinsic electron spin axis orientation or BiotSavart magnetic field rotation? 


#2
Jul1614, 03:28 PM

PF Gold
P: 1,150

The righthand rule works because it gives the same direction as the vector product in the BiotSavart law:
$$ \mathbf j(\mathbf x') \times \mathbf x  \mathbf x' $$ where ##\mathbf j## is current density at point ##\mathbf x'##, ##\mathbf x## is point where the magnetic field is sought. The vector product chooses one direction for ##\mathbf B## from two possibilities. Direction of magnetic field could have been defined to be opposite. Then we would use left hand to get this opposite direction. 


#3
Jul1614, 08:13 PM

Sci Advisor
P: 2,720

People use the right hand rule mostly because most people are right handed. It's easier to figure out the convention using the dominant hand. One can arbitrarily reverse all the fields and go by the left hand rule. The only physical effect is the motion of particles and forces on these particles inside these fields, so however direction you choose to define the fields is arbitrary as long as you get the motion correct in the end.



#4
Jul1914, 07:48 AM

Mentor
P: 16,987

Biot–Savart law: the origin of chirality?



#5
Jul2614, 11:34 PM

P: 112




#6
Jul2714, 07:56 AM

Mentor
P: 16,987

Nature doesn't pick a direction for EM (I.e. there is no chirality observed in EM). Only our conventions do pick one, and we could pick the opposite convention without changing nature or experimental results in any way.



#7
Jul2714, 10:35 AM

P: 112




#8
Jul2714, 12:10 PM

Mentor
P: 16,987

No, it doesn't.
Take any experiment you can think of, and any measurement you can devise. If we picked the opposite convention (left handed coordinates and cross products instead of right handed coordinates and cross products) then you would get all of the B fields reversing direction but none of the physically measurable results being altered in the least. If you cannot think of an example, then work out the force between two currentcarrying wires using both a left handed and a right handed convention. Don't forget to use the same handedness both for determining the direction of the field and the Lorentz force. In other words, nature does not pick the handedness of the B field (and therefore the direction of the B field), our conventions do. Nature does pick the direction of the force, and that does not exhibit any chirality. 


#9
Jul2714, 07:33 PM

P: 112

Nature does always pick the same direction relative to velocity vector.



#10
Jul2714, 10:02 PM

Mentor
P: 16,987

Work the exercise I suggested and see.



Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
Biotsavart law  Advanced Physics Homework  10  
BiotSavart law  Classical Physics  1  
Biotsavart law  Introductory Physics Homework  20  
Biot Savart's Law  General Physics  2  
Biot Savart again  Classical Physics  2 