Deriving the Vector Calculus Equation for Magnetic Force

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation and expansion of the vector calculus equation for magnetic force, specifically the expression Fmagnetic=μ0(M∇)H. Participants explore the nature of the variables involved, particularly the functions M and H, and their relationships.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the correctness of the initial expansion of the magnetic force equation, seeking clarification on the operation of vectors with the gradient operator.
  • Another participant asks whether M is a constant vector and if H is a function, indicating a need for clarification on the definitions of these variables.
  • A participant clarifies that M is a function of H and that H is a function of the vector r, which represents the radius, providing context for the equation's application.
  • Further elaboration is provided on the expression ({\bf M} \cdot \nabla) {\bf H}, with an example of how to expand this using the components of M and H.
  • Another participant assumes M is a function of x, y, z, and discusses the implications of treating M and H as vector functions, leading to a detailed expansion of the equation.
  • There is an invitation for corrections if any mistakes were made in the reasoning, indicating a collaborative approach to refining the understanding of the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and assumptions about the variables involved, with no consensus reached on the correctness of the initial expansion or the treatment of the functions M and H.

Contextual Notes

There are assumptions regarding the Cartesian coordinate system and the nature of the functions M and H that remain unresolved. The discussion also reflects uncertainty about the proper treatment of vector calculus operations in this context.

hjel0743
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I was reading a paper and came across this equation:

Fmagnetic0(M<dot>)H

Is this the correct expansion below? (I'm not too experienced with vectors operating on the gradient operator)

Fmagnetic0[(MxH/∂x)i + (MyH/∂y)j + (MzH/∂z)k]
_____________

My reasoning partially comes from this thread: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=157380
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey hjel0743 and welcome to the forums.

Just for clarification, is M a constant vector and H some kind of function?
 
Thanks for the reply chiro! I imagine I'll be here a few more times before my thesis is done... M is a function of H actually, and H is a function of the vector r, representing the radius.

The equation as initially written, describes the force on a particle by a magnetic field. H is the "H-field" and M is the magnetization.
 
<br /> ({\bf M} \cdot \nabla) {\bf H}<br /> = ( ({\bf M} \cdot \nabla H_x) \widehat{i} <br /> + ({\bf M} \cdot \nabla H_y) \widehat{j}<br /> + ({\bf M} \cdot \nabla H_z) \widehat{k}).

Where, for example,
<br /> {\bf M} \cdot \nabla H_x = M_x \frac{\partial H_x}{\partial x}<br /> + M_y \frac{\partial H_x}{\partial y}<br /> + M_z \frac{\partial H_x}{\partial z}.<br />
 
Assuming your M is a function of x,y,z (in vector form you have M = (Mx,My,Mz) where Mx,My,Mz map R^3 to R for each component) then

del(M) = (d/dx . Mx + d/dy . My + d/dz . Mz)H (I'm assuming everything is Cartesian not a general tensor)
= (dMx/dx + dMy/dy + dMz/dz) H.

Now this will give you the product of two functions but if H is a vector (like M with each component have some transformation from R^3 -> R) then this means you use the scalar form of a*v = (a*v1,a*v2,a*v3) which means if H = (Hx,Hy,Hz) then the whole thing is equal to

(dMx/dx + dMy/dy + dMz/dz) * <Hx,Hy,Hz>

Now M . grad(Hx) = <Mx,My,Mz> . <dHx/dx,dHx/dy,dHx/dz>
= Mx*dHx/dx + My.dHx/dy + Mz.dHx/dz

So they both look the same when they are expanded out, so I imagine you are right in your assertion. (It's been a while since I've done this kind of thing myself).

If I've made a mistake please let me know!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
4K