Deriving Curl of B from Biot-Savart Law & Vector Identity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the curl of the magnetic field \( B \) from the Biot-Savart law and exploring the implications of certain vector identities. Participants examine the mathematical intricacies involved in the derivation, particularly focusing on the behavior of the current density \( J \) and the vector field \( \frac{r-r'}{|r-r'|^3} \) in the context of singularities and integrals.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the equation for \( \nabla \times B(r) \) using the Biot-Savart law and a vector identity, asserting that the current density \( J \) is constant and leads to certain conditions on divergence.
  • Another participant suggests that \( \nabla \cdot B \) results in a delta function, indicating the presence of a point source.
  • Some participants argue that \( J(r') \cdot \nabla B \) integrates to zero over a large volume, citing the divergence theorem and the behavior of the vector field at infinity.
  • Concerns are raised about the undefined nature of certain expressions when \( r - r' = 0 \), with requests for clarification on why certain terms do not vanish outside this singularity.
  • There are discussions about the implications of the vector identity involving the gradient of a dot product and how it relates to the current density and magnetic field.
  • One participant posits that the curl of \( B \) can be considered zero due to the electrostatic nature of the field described.
  • Another participant questions the validity of assuming the integral vanishes despite the singularity at \( r - r' = 0 \), leading to further exploration of limits and behavior near this point.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some agreeing on the application of vector identities and the behavior of integrals, while others contest the assumptions made regarding singularities and the implications for the curl of \( B \). The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives on the mathematical treatment of the problem.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the undefined nature of certain expressions at \( r - r' = 0 \) and the dependence on the assumptions made about the current density \( J \) and its behavior at large distances. The discussion does not reach a consensus on how to handle these singularities in the context of the integral.

  • #31
about symmetry:

if you first calculate the magnetic vector potential for a spherical surface:

one starts with the magnetic vector potential formula for a point inside or outside a spherical electrically charged rotating surface

$$\textbf{A}=\frac{\mu_o}{4 \pi}\int \frac{\sigma \omega \times \textbf{r}}{\sqrt{R^2+r^2-2Rrcos \theta}} $$

For a figure refer to example 5.11 Griffiths 4th edition. Introduction to electrodynamics:

1611087032189.png


After calculations one obtains that the magnetic vector potential inside and outside is (refer to example 5.11 in Griffiths for this)

Inside spherical surface: $$\frac{\mu_0 R \sigma}{3} \omega \times \textbf{r} $$

Outside spherical surface:
$$\frac{\mu_0 R^4 \sigma}{3 r^3} \omega \times \textbf{r} $$

both are directed along ##\phi## axis.

imagine that we want to find the magnetic vector potential inside a sphere we have cut out a smaller sphere symmetrical with origo in the middle. Where ##r_2## is the radius of the cut out sphere. ##r_1## is the radius placement of the point we want to find the magnetic vector potential. And R is the radius of the outer sphere. ##\sigma=\rho dr##. And denoting R=r' since we are dealing with many spherical surfaces. The magnetic vector potential becomes:

$$\textbf{A}=\frac{\mu_0 }{3} \omega r_1 sin \theta \int_{r_1}r \rho r' dr' + \frac{\mu_0 }{3 r_1^2} \omega sin \theta \int_{r_2}^{r_1} \rho (r')^4 dr' $$

After some calculation we obtain that this is:

$$\textbf{A}=\rho \mu_0 \omega sin\theta \frac{1}{6}[(r_1 R^2 - \frac{3}{5}r_1^3) - \frac{2}{10} \frac{1}{r_1^2} r_2^5]$$

By using that ##\rho= \frac{3Q}{4 \pi R^3}## we obtain that

$$\textbf{B}= \nabla \times \textbf{A}=\frac{\mu_0 \omega Q}{4 \pi R^3}{[R^2-\frac{3r^2}{5}]cos \theta e_r - sin \theta (R^2-6 \frac{r^2}{5})} e_{\theta}$$

By taking curl of this we obtain that

$$ \nabla \times \textbf{B}= \frac{Q \mu_0 \omega sin \theta}{4 \pi R^3} [-\frac{1}{r}( R^2-\frac{36}{10} r_1^2 - 2 \frac{1}{10 r_1^3}r_2^5 + \frac{1}{r}(R^2-\frac{3}{5} r_1^2 - \frac{2}{10} \frac{1}{r_1^3} r_2^5)] e_{\theta}$$

$$ \nabla \times \textbf{B}=\frac{Q \mu_0 \omega sin \theta}{\frac{4}{3}\pi R^3}r_1 e_{\theta}=\mu_0 J e_{\theta}$$The nice thing with this result is that we can set ##r_2=0## so that we are looking at the curl of B inside a rotating sphere. Or we can set ##r_2## approx as large as R so that we look at the curl of B of a rotating spherical surface. Either way the result is ## \nabla \times \textbf{B}=\mu_0 J##

This leads me to my question: The result above illustrates that the curl of B from the spherical surfaces inside ##r_1## cancels due to symmetry. But when it comes to a general calculation of curl of B I don't know in general how to show that curl of B in other points then the point you are calculating curl of B cancels. Anyone know how to do this? For a start look at point 24.

In the end to clear up why I am writing this post. 1: I don't understand the proof for why ## \nabla \cdot \textbf{A}## is 0 in more common proofs therefore I am looking for a different angle.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
690
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
763
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
739
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K