Are Both Conditions Necessary to Confirm a Conservative Electric Field?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conditions necessary to confirm whether an electric field is conservative in the context of electromagnetism. Participants explore the relationship between two conditions: the curl of the electric field being zero and the line integral of the electric field around a closed loop being zero.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses uncertainty about whether both conditions (curl of E = 0 and line integral of E around a closed loop = 0) must be satisfied to confirm a conservative electric field.
  • Another participant asserts that the second condition is a definition of a conservative field and that the first condition can be shown to be equivalent to the second by expressing the electric field as the gradient of a scalar field.
  • A later reply suggests that while the second condition can simplify calculations, the first condition is generally easier to compute when determining if a vector field is conservative.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether both conditions must be tested or if one implies the other. There are differing views on the practicality of using each condition for verification.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not resolve the ambiguity regarding the necessity of testing both conditions or the implications of one condition on the other.

Spoony
Messages
77
Reaction score
0
I'm being taught electromagnetism at university, but there's one definition that has been left slightly ambiguous for an electric field to be conservative I've been taught that
1) [tex]\nabla[/tex]xE = 0
But I've also been taught that
2) [tex]\oint[/tex] E.dl = 0

But I am not sure if 1) & 2) have to be true for it to be conservitive.
OR that if 1) is true then 2) is true (and visa versa) ie, 1) [tex]\Leftrightarrow[/tex] 2)

So do i have to test for both to check the field is conservitive, or just one and say it implies the other.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
2. is a definition, which is equivalent to saying a vector field E is conservative if is can be written as the gradient of some scalar field.
1. can be shown to be equivalent to 2. by writing [itex]\mathbf{E}=\nabla\phi[/itex] and taking the curl.

So, in short, no you don't need to test both. Most of the time it's a lot easier to calculate 1. to check whether the vector field is conservative.
 
Thanks dude :)
 
In addition to what cristo said, knowing that (2) is true for a conservative field can make later calculations easier, but as cristo said, (1) is usually easier to calculate. So if you're asked to prove whether a vector field is conservative it is usually best to use (1), but it is also useful to know (2) as well.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
10K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
958
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K