What is the proper name for H?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter sniffer
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the proper nomenclature for the magnetic field strength denoted by H in electrodynamics. Participants explore the terminology used in various texts and the implications of naming conventions in the context of magnetic fields and flux densities.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that H is referred to as "magnetic field strength" or "magnetic field intensity."
  • Others argue that the term "magnetic field" for H is misleading and should be avoided, suggesting that it is more appropriate to refer to it as the "Auxiliary field H," as noted by Griffiths.
  • A participant mentions that A. Sommerfeld criticized the use of "magnetic field" for H, indicating that this terminology has historically led to confusion.
  • There is a discussion about the inconsistency in terminology, where H is sometimes incorrectly labeled as the magnetic field instead of B, which is traditionally referred to as magnetic flux density or induction.
  • One participant emphasizes that the electric flux D is consistently defined regardless of material, while the behavior of H varies in the presence of magnetic materials, suggesting a deeper complexity in the definitions.
  • Another participant points out that the terminology used can lead to confusion, particularly regarding the relationship between D and enclosed charge, clarifying that D is a vector field and does not contain charge itself.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate terminology for H, with no consensus reached on a definitive name. The discussion highlights multiple competing perspectives on the implications of naming conventions in electrodynamics.

Contextual Notes

The discussion reveals limitations in the historical terminology used in physics, which may not align with modern interpretations and can lead to confusion in understanding the relationships between different fields and fluxes.

sniffer
Messages
112
Reaction score
0
in electrodynamics, we have magnetization M.
the other quantity associated with free current is H.

i haven't seen a book that gives the name to H. what is the proper name assign to H?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
CRC: magnetic field strength, or magnetic field intensity.
 
Unfortunately, many authors call H and not B the magnetic field and invent a new word for B like flux density or or induction (very poor choice, since that gives the word yet another meaning). H doesn't really have an appropriate name, but Griffith's names the chapter on it the 'Auxiliary field 'H'', but agrees to just call it "H". It seems A. Sommerfeld has written in his book on electrodynamics:
The unhappy term "magnetic field" for H should be avoided as far as possible. It seems to us that this term has led into error none less than Maxwell himself..."
 
Galileo said:
Unfortunately, many authors call H and not B the magnetic field and invent a new word for B like flux density or or induction (very poor choice, since that gives the word yet another meaning). H doesn't really have an appropriate name, but Griffith's names the chapter on it the 'Auxiliary field 'H'', but agrees to just call it "H". It seems A. Sommerfeld has written in his book on electrodynamics:

In MKS units E is the electric field, H is the magnetic field, D is the
electric flux and B is the magnetic flux.

This usage is self-consistent even if traditionally the magnetic flux is what
has been referred to as the magnetic field.

To make this plain, by Gauss' law the electric flux D always equals the
charge enclosed (to within a multiplicative constant) regardless of the
material around the charge. The electric field would vary.

If there were magnetic monopoles, the magnetic field H would vary in the
presence of magnetic materials but the magnetic flux B would only
represent the presence of the enclosed magnetic charge.

The historical physics terminology is inconsistent in this regard.
 
Last edited:
Antiphon said:
In MKS units E is the electric field, H is the magnetic field, D is the
electric flux and B is the magnetic flux.

This usage is self-consistent even if traditionally the magnetic flux is what
has been referred to as the magnetic field.

To make this plain, by Gauss' law the electric flux D always equals the
charge enclosed (to within a multiplicative constant) regardless of the
material around the charge. The electric field would vary.
It is not a matter of inconsistency, but of inconsequent terminology.
The FLUX of some vector field (through some surface S) is:
[tex]\Phi_F = \int_S \vec F \cdot \vec dr[/tex]
So [itex]\Phi_E[/itex] is the electric flux and [itex]\Phi_B[/itex] the magnetic flux. This makes it seemingly reasonable to name E and B electric- and magnetic flux density.

This can already lead to confusion in your post. You said the electric flux D equals the charge enclosed within. D is a vector field, it does not contain charge. You mean [itex]\Phi_D[/itex] through a closed surface equals the enclosed charge (to within some constant ofcourse).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
9K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K