Confusion in Maxwell's derivation of Ampere's Force Law - II

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around confusion regarding Maxwell's derivation of Ampere's Force Law as presented in his work "A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism." Participants are examining specific equations and their generalizations, particularly focusing on the transition from a special case to a general case in the context of the derivation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the validity of the generalization of the equation ##P=\dfrac{B+C}{2r}## from a special case (where l=1, m=0, n=0) to a general case (where 0 < l, m, n < 1), suggesting that the derivation does not hold under the latter conditions.
  • Another participant expresses frustration with the outdated notation used by Maxwell and suggests that translating the argument into modern vector calculus notation might clarify the concepts.
  • A different participant indicates that they have not encountered significant difficulties with the notation up to page 156 but seeks clarification on the generalization of ##P=\dfrac{B+C}{2r}## for all values of l, m, n, and for open circuits.
  • One participant admits to struggling with understanding the symbols and notation used by Maxwell, noting the challenges of interpreting 19th-century literature without modern vector notation.
  • A later reply suggests that the discussion may belong more to the history and philosophy of science, recommending that those interested in the subject should learn it using modern methods for ease of understanding.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of confusion regarding Maxwell's notation and derivations, with no consensus on the validity of the generalization of the equation or the clarity of the original text. Multiple competing views on the effectiveness of modern versus historical notation are present.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding due to the historical context of Maxwell's notation and the potential challenges in translating these ideas into modern terms. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity involved in the mathematical derivations presented by Maxwell.

faheemahmed6000
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
I am reading Maxwell's "a treatise on electricity and magnetism, Volume 2, page 156" about "Ampere's Force Law". I have some confusion in the following pages:
a5BT4.png
KCnOT.png


My question is of two parts:
1.Equation 20, i.e. ##P=\dfrac{B+C}{2r}## is the outcome of special case (i.e. l=1, m=0, n=0)

But in Page 156, Article 517, Maxwell says: "We can now eliminate P, and find the general value of ##\dfrac{dX}{ds}##" and uses this formula (i.e. ##P=\dfrac{B+C}{2r}##) in the general case.

However in the general case, where 0 < l, m, n < 1, and hence
##\dfrac{d^{2}X}{dsds'}=l\left( \frac{dP}{ds'}\xi^{2}-\dfrac{dQ}{ds'}+(B+C)\dfrac{l'\xi}{r}\right) +m(...)+n(...)\neq0##
(since direction of X is not in the direction of ds)

therefore,
##\dfrac{dX}{ds}=l\left[ (P\xi^{2}-Q)_{(s',0)}-\int\limits_0^s' (2Pr-B-C)\dfrac{l'\xi}{r}ds'\right] +m\int\limits_0^s'(...)ds'+n\int\limits_0^s'(...)ds'##
Now in this general case, how can we get ##P=\dfrac{B+C}{2r}##.

If ##P\neq\dfrac{B+C}{2r}## in general case, what does Maxwell mean by "We can now eliminate P, and find the general value of ##\dfrac{dX}{ds}##"
2. How can one get equation 21 from equation 15. Please give a lengthy derivation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, it's a pity that you get no answers. My problem is that I have not the time to decipher Maxwell's ancient notation to make sense of it. Perhaps, it helps, if you "translate" the argument in modern standard notation of vector calculus?
 
Up to here (page 156), there is no dot or cross product and the language and notation (except a few) are common. I had nothing to 'decipher' up to page 156 (except to solve a few maths). What I only don't understand (up to page 156) is the generalisation of ##P=\dfrac{B+C}{2r}##. Can you please go through the pages and explain why ##P=\dfrac{B+C}{2r}## is generalised for all values of ##l, m, n## as well as for open circuits while it is derived from special case ##(l=1, m=0, n=0)##? There is nothing hard to decipher here. I am reading this old book because this is only where I find a historic derivation of Ampere's Force Law. Any help would be appreciated.
 
Well, I've no clue what all the symbols mean and thus have even less a clue what Maxwell is doing there :-(. It's very hard for me to follow 19th century literature before the invention of modern vector notation (which is, as far as I know, due to the successors of Maxwell like Heaviside and Poynting in applying his theory to the upcoming engineering problems related to telegraphs, sea cables, etc.). Even the electromagnetic part of Einstein's famous paper of 1905 about special relativity is very hard to read, because he writes out everything in terms of components of the fields. If you "translate" it to modern notation, it's pretty quickly obvious, what he is doing!
 
How do I translate it to vector notation
 
I believe that what you are doing belongs to the history and philosophy of science. If you want lo learn the subject I suggest you do it in the modern way.It is eassier in that way
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K