Confused about Poynting Theorem and Retarded field.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the application of Poynting's theorem and the concept of retarded fields in electromagnetic theory, specifically referencing Griffiths' "Introduction to Electrodynamics." Participants express confusion regarding the calculation of energy flow into a defined box using different methods: one using the surface integral of the Poynting vector and the other using stored energy in the electromagnetic field. The book's approach, which focuses on potential energy rather than the expected surface integral, raises questions about its validity in the context of retarded fields. Additionally, there is a mention of using the wave equation for the vector potential to derive current density, leading to further discussions about the implications of zero current density on energy calculations. The conversation highlights the complexities and nuances involved in applying these electromagnetic principles correctly.
yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
294
This is not homework even thought this is an example in the book of Griffiths "Introduction of Electrodynamics" 3rd edition. This is a mix retarded field and Poynting theorem question:

\vec E \cdot \vec J \;=\;-\frac 1 2 \frac {\partial}{\partial t} ( \epislon_0 E^2 +\frac 1 {\mu_0} B^2) \;-\;\frac 1 {\mu_0} \nabla \cdot (\vec E X \vec B) (8.8)

\frac {dW}{dt} \;=\; \int _{v'} (\vec E \cdot \vec J) d \vec {v'} \;=\; -\frac 1 2 \frac {\partial}{\partial t} \int _{v'} ( \epsilon_0 E^2 +\frac 1 {\mu_0} B^2) d \vec {v'}\;-\;\frac 1 {\mu_0} \int _{s'} (\vec E X \vec B) d \vec {s'} (8.9)




In this example, the book given:
V=0,\;\;\hbox{ and } \;\;\vec A=\frac{\mu_0 k}{4c}(ct-|x|)^2 \hat z \;\hbox { for x = +ve and }\;\; \vec A=0 \;\;\hbox { for x = -ve.}

c=\frac 1 {\sqrt{\mu_0 \epsilon_0}}

From this, you get:

\vec E= -\frac {\partial \vec A}{\partial t} \;=\; -\frac {\mu_0 k}{2} (ct-|x|)\hat z \;\;\;\hbox { and }\;\;\; \vec B = \nabla X \vec A = ^+_- \hat y \frac{\mu_0 k}{2c}(ct-|x|)



Then the book want to determine the energy per unit time flowing into a box between t1 and t2 with given:

1) Dimensions of the box are 0<y<w, 0<z<l and d<x<(d+h) where w,l, d and h are all +ve number.

2) t1= d/c and t2 =(d+h)/c where c=\frac 1 {\sqrt{\epsilon_0 \mu_0}}.

Since x is +ve and t1= d/c and t2 =(d+h)/c therefore:

\vec E= -\frac {\mu_0 k}{2} (d+h-x)\hat z \;\;\;\hbox { and }\;\;\; \vec B = \hat y \frac{\mu_0 k}{2c}(d+h-x)



Since the question is energy flow into the box, I use second integration term of (8.9)
W \;=\; [\frac 1 {\mu_0} \int _{s&#039;} (\vec E X \vec B) d \vec {s&#039;}]




But the book do this instead:

W\;=\; \frac 1 2 \int _{v&#039;} ( \epsilon_0 E^2 + \frac 1 {\mu_0} B^2) d v&#039;


My understanding is \frac 1 {\mu_0} \int _{s&#039;} (\vec E X \vec B) d \vec {s&#039;} is the EM power flowing through the surface s&#039;. Why is the book use the stored energy or the energy to assemble the charge and current to do the calculation? This is retarded field problem where the EM field just reach the box at t1 and nothing exit the box at t2.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Anyone please?

I did more reading, even the examples from the book use the surface integral of the Poynting Vector to find the energy per unit time cross the surface. But here the book use the potential energy of the EM field which I cannot agree.
 
what is ve?
 
kcdodd said:
what is ve?

+ve and -ve is just lazy way to say possitive and negative resp.
 
Do you mean that x = +ve means x > 0?

What I was going to say is that you can use the wave equation for the vector potential to find the current density.

\nabla^2\vec{A} - \frac{1}{c^2}\partial^2_t\vec{A} = -\mu_0\vec{J}

And it looks to me like like J = 0, which would mean J*E = 0 too, which means the two integrals must be equal in magnitude. However the setup is still a bit confusing to me, there is funny business at x=0.
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top