Decompose the E field into conservative and non-conservative parts

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter alan123hk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field parts
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the decomposition of electric fields into conservative and non-conservative parts, particularly in the context of circuit analysis and electromagnetic theory. Participants explore the implications of this decomposition for practical calculations and theoretical understanding, referencing specific examples and models.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that splitting electric fields is a useful calculation method, particularly in circuit analysis, while others argue it is unnecessary if the lumped element model is valid.
  • One participant provides an example involving a transformer and voltage loop equations, claiming that splitting the electric field simplifies calculations.
  • Another participant emphasizes that if the magnetic field is zero, all EMFs are produced by potential electric fields, allowing for the use of potential functions without the need for splitting.
  • Concerns are raised about the validity of the EMF source in the provided diagrams, questioning whether the lumped element model applies.
  • Some participants discuss the Lewin circuit paradox, with differing views on whether it represents a genuine paradox or a misunderstanding of the lumped model.
  • A later reply introduces a more theoretical perspective, discussing the mathematical properties of electromagnetic fields and the implications of gauge transformations on electric and magnetic potentials.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity and validity of splitting electric fields in circuit analysis. While some find it a helpful method, others argue against its necessity, leading to an unresolved discussion with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific conditions under which their arguments hold, such as the assumption of no time-varying magnetic fields and the applicability of the lumped element model. The discussion also touches on the limitations of the provided diagrams and the clarity of the proposed calculation methods.

  • #61
I'm not trying to prove anything in this discussion thread, I'm just describing a concept and a simple calculation method. If people question or even thinks this is wrong, I'll try to explain it.

I should also mention about that the so-called build-up of charge on the surface of the wire creates an electric field that counteracts and cancels the induced electric field inside the wire. If there is a curl of electric field inside the wire, it cannot be eliminated. In this case, the curl of electric field creates large eddy currents inside the wire, resulting in energy losses (ohmic losses and radiation, etc.). In other words, it can only be said that this cancellation works in a fixed direction and very localized region of space.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
alan123hk said:
If people question or even thinks this is wrong, I'll try to explain it.
Because we may consider the method incorrect does not necessarilly mean we misunderstand your method.
If we do misunderstand please explain, but please seriously consider the other possibility.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy and vanhees71
  • #63
The description of example 10.12 (https://web.mit.edu/6.013_book/www/chapter10/10.1.html) may be considered wrong, because the induced electric field is generally a time-varying field, so all other electric fields correspondingly generated in the system are time-varying, it cannot be accurately described by Laplace's equation. This is because Laplace's equation only applies to regions that do not contain charge, current, or time-dependent electromagnetic phenomena.

Circuit-40.jpg

However, this is probably a matter of opinion. Since the author uses Laplace's equation, it has been implied that the rate of change of the current should be a constant to get an accurate answer. Even if it is not constant, as long as the rate of change is low enough or the frequency is low enough, an approximation can be obtained. If the error in this approximation is considered acceptable, then it is a correct calculation.
 
Last edited:
  • #64
The title of the chapter might be a clue.

10.1

Magnetoquasistatic Electric Fields in Systems of

PerfectConductors

 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
  • #65
Similarly, in the following equation, if the charge distribution and current are constant or change very slowly, all the electric fields generated by the charges can be approximately described by the conservative fields ##~-\nabla ~ \theta~##, and the term ##-\frac {\partial A} {\partial t}## only represents the induced electric field.
$$ \\ E=-\nabla ~ \theta-\frac {\partial A} {\partial t}=E_c+E_a $$ If ## -\frac {\partial A} {\partial t} ## to represent the only non-conservative field ##E ~##that actually exists. Then it will become as follows. $$E= E_c+E ~~~~~\Rightarrow~~~~~E_c=0$$
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
10K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K