Jefimenko B-field approximation

This rule is equivalent to the one you used in 1D. If, on the other hand, I wanted to calculate \int f(\textbf{r})(\mathbf{\nabla}g(\textbf{r}))\cdot d\textbf{r} over some surface, I might find it useful to use the product rule \mathbf{\nabla}\times(fg)=f(\mathbf{\nabla}\times\mathbf{g})+(\mathbf{\nabla}f)\times g to transfer the derivative to g instead.In your case, you're trying to calculate \int_V (\mathbf{x}\cdot\mathbf{x}')(\mathbf{x}'\times
  • #1
Pengwuino
Gold Member
5,124
20
I'm looking to evaluate the magnetic field using Jefimenko's equations. There is two parts to it but I'm just looking at the first. The approximation is r>>r' where r' is localized about the origin. The Jefimenko's equation for the magnetic field (the first term that I'm having trouble with) has:

[tex]B(\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} ,t) = \frac{{\mu _0 }}{{4\pi }}\int\limits_v {d^3 x'\{ [J(\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x}' ,t')]_{ret} \times \frac{{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over R} }}{{R^3 }}} \} [/tex]

[tex]R = |\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} - \mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} '|[/tex]

using the taylor expansion:

[tex]\frac{1}{{|\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} - \mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} '|^3 }} \approx \frac{1}{{|\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} |^3 }} + \mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} ' \cdot [\nabla '(\frac{1}{{|\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} - \mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} '|^3 }})]_{\vec x' = 0} [/tex]

Now, 4 terms are generated. One will go away, one is easily solved, but what I'm having trouble with are terms like this:

[tex]\frac{{ - \mu _0 }}{{4\pi }}\int\limits_v {(\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} ' \cdot [\nabla '(\frac{1}{{R^3 }})]_{\vec x' = 0} )\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} ' \times [J(\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} ,t')]_{ret} d^3 x} [/tex]

I want to pull the derivative operator off the 1/R^3 through an integration by parts but since it's evaluated at r'=0, I'm not exactly confident on how to do that. I want the derivative operator on things such as [tex]\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} ' \times [J(\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} ',t')]_{ret} [/tex] which are somewhat like the magnetic moment once integrated but wonder if I still evaluate the original part at r'=0 or does the evaluation switch over to the part I'm now using the derivative operator on? Or does it go onto both now?

Signed,
Confused in Antarctica
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Pengwuino said:
I want to pull the derivative operator off the 1/R^3 through an integration by parts but since it's evaluated at r'=0, I'm not exactly confident on how to do that.

You can't. As you said, [tex]\left.\mathbf{\nabla}'\left[\frac{1}{|\textbf{x}-\textbf{x}'|^3}\right]\right|_{\texbf{x}'=0}[/tex] is evaluated at [itex]\textbf{x}'=0[/itex], making the result a function only of [itex]\textbf{x}[/itex]. So, just calculate that function and pull it out of the integral since it has no dependence on the primed coordinates.
 
  • #3
Also, you seem to be missing a term involving [tex]\mathbf{\dot{J}}(\textbf{x}',t_r)[/tex] in your original equation.
 
  • #4
Yes, I left out that term becuase I haven't looked at it yet, I was just wanting to post what part I was having problem with. After talking to a few people we came to the same conclusion however, doing the evaulation makes it impossible to pull off the gradiant I guess. I found out the hopefuly correct way of doing it and I shall give it a shot.
 
  • #5
So now I'm stuck with doing these 3-dimensional integration by parts. I need to work with this integral. I'm trying to do it by integration by parts but since it's in 3 dimensions, I'm not sure how it's done. I'm quite amazed that I don't think I've ever run across a 3-dimensional IVP that didnt use Gauss' law or anything. The steps so far are:

[tex]\begin{array}{l}
\int_V {(\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} \cdot \mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} ')(} \mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} ' \times \left. {[J(\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} ',t')]} \right|_{ret} )d^3 x' \\
u = (\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} \cdot \mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} ') \\
dw = \mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} \times \left. {[J(\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} ',t')]} \right|_{ret} )d^3 x' \\
w = 2\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over m} \\
du = ? \\
\end{array}[/tex]

Now I figure I can't simply naively say that [tex]du = \mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\rightharpoonup$}}
\over x} d^3 x'[/tex] because then I have a vector multiplying a vector. Doing the actual computation seems to give me:

[tex]du = xdx' + ydy' + zdz'[/tex]

and now I have just a sum of 3 integrations. Is this all correct mathematically? It's worrisome because the integral over prime coordinates diverge since the integration is over an arbitrary volume.
 
  • #6
In one dimesion, integration by parts is derived from the product rule:

[tex](fg)'=f'g+fg'\implies \int f'g dx=\int(fg)'dx-\int fg' dx= fg-\int fg' dx[/tex]

In 3 dimensions, things are not so simple; there are actually 8 product rules and each leads to a different variation of integration by parts. So, in order to use IBP in vector calculus, you need to select an appropriate product rule.

For example, if I wanted to calculate [itex]\int f(\textbf{r})(\mathbf{\nabla}g(\textbf{r}))\cdot d\textbf{r}[/itex] over some curve, I might find it useful to use the product rule [itex]\mathbf{\nabla}(fg)=(\mathbf{\nabla}f)g+f(\mathbf{\nabla}g)[/itex] to transfer the derivative to [itex]g[/itex] instead.
 

What is the Jefimenko B-field approximation?

The Jefimenko B-field approximation is an approximate solution to the magnetic field generated by time-varying electric fields, based on the work of physicist Oleg D. Jefimenko.

How is the Jefimenko B-field approximation calculated?

The Jefimenko B-field approximation is calculated using the Jefimenko's equations, which are a set of equations that describe the electric and magnetic fields generated by time-varying electric fields.

What is the purpose of using the Jefimenko B-field approximation?

The Jefimenko B-field approximation is commonly used in electrodynamics to calculate the magnetic fields generated by time-varying electric fields, especially in situations where the electric fields are not easily solvable using other methods.

What are the limitations of the Jefimenko B-field approximation?

The Jefimenko B-field approximation is only an approximate solution and may not accurately describe the magnetic fields in all situations. It also does not take into account the effects of magnetization or displacement currents.

Is the Jefimenko B-field approximation applicable to all scenarios?

No, the Jefimenko B-field approximation is not applicable to all scenarios. It is most useful for situations where the electric fields are time-varying and can be treated as quasi-static, and when the current distribution is known or can be assumed.

Similar threads

  • Electromagnetism
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top