Biot-Savart Law: Proven or Guessed?

AI Thread Summary
The Biot-Savart Law was initially deduced by Laplace from experimental observations made by Biot and Savart. It is connected to Maxwell's equations, as one can be derived from the other. While some view the law as a guess that aligns with Maxwell's generalizations, it is fundamentally based on empirical evidence. The validity of the Biot-Savart Law is supported by experimental results, affirming its status as a proven physical law. Ultimately, the relationship between the two laws highlights the importance of experimental verification in physics.
Bobhawke
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
Is the Biot Savart law similar to the coulomb law in that it is something that is guessed initially, and later shown to give the same solution that Maxwell's equations give (except Maxwell's equations are a generalisation), or is it something that is proven? And if it is proven, could someone provide that proof.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Physical laws are based on experimental observation.
The B-S law was deduced by Laplace, based on measurements by Biot and Savart.
Maxwell later derived one of his equations from it.
You can derive Max's equation from B-S or B-S from Max's equation, so they are connected, but the proof is in the pudding (experiment).
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...

Similar threads

Back
Top