Boundary conditions ##\vec{B}## and ##\vec{H}##

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on boundary conditions for magnetic fields, specifically the equations governing the divergence and curl of the magnetic field vectors ##\vec{B}## and ##\vec{H}##. It highlights that while the curls may not be necessary for the problem at hand, understanding the perpendicular magnetization components is crucial. There is uncertainty about whether the boundary conditions should apply only on-axis or across the entire surface, suggesting the potential use of a surface current model. The conversation also notes that standard methods exist to solve the problem without needing Legendre's method. Overall, the participants aim to clarify the conditions for the parallel components of ##\vec{H}## across the surface.
happyparticle
Messages
490
Reaction score
24
Homework Statement
Find boundary conditions ##\vec{B}## and ##\vec{H}## for a cylinder of radius a and length 4a and ##\vec{M} = M\hat{z}## on the axis of the cylinder
Relevant Equations
##\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{B} = 0##
##\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{H} = - \vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{M}##
##\vec{\nabla} x \vec{B} = \mu_0 \vec{J}##
##\vec{\nabla} x \vec{H} = \mu_0 \vec{J}_f##
When asking for boundary conditions I'm wondering if this is enough in this situation to give
##\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{B} = 0 , B_{2\perp} - B_{1 \perp} = 0##
##\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{H} = - \vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{M}, H_{2\perp} - H_{1 \perp} = - (M_{2\perp} - M_{1 \perp})##
##\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{B} = \mu_0 \vec{J}, B_{2\||} - B_{1 \||} = \mu_0 \vec{K} \times \hat{n}##
##\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{H} = \mu_0 \vec{J}_f , H_{2 \||} - H_{1 \||} = \vec{K}_f \times \hat{n}##
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It probably isn't necessary to include anything about the curls of the vectors, because that is a surface current type treatment that is completely separate from the pole model of magnetostatics. Meanwhile, what do you know about ## M_{2 \, perpendicular} ## ? =if it is outside of the material? For the ## M_{in \, perpendicular} ##, it is ## -M ## on the left endface, and ## +M ## on the right endface.

Edit: Scratch part of that=I think they may be looking for boundary conditions everywhere on the surface, (they aren't completely clear here=do they want just the on-axis conditions? ), and it may be useful to employ the surface current model to get the conditions for the parallel components.

It may be worth mentioning that this problem has two very standard ways of solving it, and Legendre's method with boundary conditions are not needed to solve it. See https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/a-magnetostatics-problem-of-interest-2.971045/
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes happyparticle
a follow-on: It still needs a little work, but let's get started using ## \nabla \times \vec{H}=\vec{J}_{free}=0 ##. Using Stokes theorem on this, what can you say about the parallel components of ## \vec{H} ## anywhere on the entire surface, i.e. ## H_{out \, parallel} ## and ## H_{in \, parallel} ##?
 
Finally find it, thank you.
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top