Curl H outside a long, thin wire of constant current

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of Maxwell's equations, specifically focusing on the curl of the magnetic field intensity vector H in the context of a long, thin wire carrying a constant current. The original poster presents a paradox regarding the calculation of curl H outside the wire, where it appears to be non-zero despite the expectation that it should be zero in the absence of current density.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to reconcile the apparent contradiction between the theoretical expectation of curl H being zero and the calculated non-zero value using Ampere's law. Some participants suggest exploring different coordinate systems to clarify the components of H and their derivatives.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different approaches to understand the behavior of curl H. One participant has switched to cylindrical coordinates and expresses a newfound understanding, indicating that some productive direction has been achieved.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of the original poster's confusion regarding the treatment of the x component of H and the implications of using different coordinate systems for the analysis.

rude man
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
8,032
Reaction score
870

Homework Statement


Per Maxwell's equation and my H. H. Skilling EM textbook, curl H = 0 in the absence of current density.

But consider a long, thin wire along the z axis carrying time-invariant current I. By Ampere's law, at a point (x,0) outside the wire, H = I/2πx j . But curl H computed by Cramer's rule from the curl determinant is not zero.

2. Relevant equations

curl H = J + ∂D /∂t
2πxH = I

The Attempt at a Solution



Since I is time-invariant there is no time-varying electric field so ∂D/∂t = 0.

Since H = H j = I/2πx j at (x,0),
curl H = ∂H/∂x k - ∂H/∂z i
but for a long wire, ∂H/∂z = 0 so we wind up with
curl H = dH/dx k
= -I/2π x2 k ≠ 0.

So how is the paradox resolved, please? If you're familiar with the concept of little "paddle wheels" (Skilling uses) indicating curl, even there it seems curl H ≠ 0 outside the wire.

All glory and thanks to the resolver!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If you want to work in Cartesian coordinates, then first work out the general expression for the components of H in terms of x and y. Since you are going to take derivatives, you don't want to let y = 0 until after taking the derivatives.
 

Attachments

  • Skilling Wheel.jpg
    Skilling Wheel.jpg
    8.4 KB · Views: 471
Last edited:
Thanks, T. Will explore! I had a faint idea I shouldn't ignore the x component of H but never paid it enough attention.
 
I switched to cylindrical coordinates, and lo & behold ... :smile:

I won't bother with the cartesian but obviously am now a Believer! Thanks again, will get to sleep a bit faster now ...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K