Disappearing terms in electrodynamics boundary conditions

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the disappearance of certain terms, specifically the first derivatives of the electric displacement field (D) and magnetic field (B), when applying Maxwell's equations in the context of boundary conditions. It is established that while the displacement current and time derivative of the magnetic field vanish in an infinitesimal volume, conduction current and surface charge do not. The argument presented in various texts, including Hayt and Pozar, suggests that the finite nature of these terms in an infinitesimal volume is insufficient to justify their disappearance, prompting a request for a more robust explanation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Maxwell's equations in differential form
  • Familiarity with Gauss's Law in macroscopic electrodynamics
  • Knowledge of boundary conditions in electromagnetic theory
  • Concept of singularities in charge distributions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the Heaviside-Lorentz units in electrodynamics
  • Examine the role of surface charge density in boundary conditions
  • Research the mathematical treatment of singularities in electromagnetic fields
  • Explore advanced texts on electromagnetic theory for deeper insights into boundary conditions
USEFUL FOR

Electromagnetic theorists, physicists, and advanced students in electrical engineering seeking to deepen their understanding of boundary conditions and the behavior of electromagnetic fields at interfaces.

Ahmad Kishki
Messages
158
Reaction score
13
In the derivation of the boundary conditions we apply the integral form of maxwell's equations, but once we take a very small volume we find that some terms disappear like the displacement current as well as the time derivative of the magnetic field. Why do these terms disappear? For reference the terms that disappear: first derivative of D wrt time and first derivative of B wrt time, but the conduction current and surface charge don't disappear.

I looked at many books (Hayt, Pozar, and some online books), and the only argument they put forward is that these terms are finite and the volume/surface/contour is infinitesimal, but this same argument can be used for the terms that don't disappear as well! Please provide an argument that can nit be used against those terms that don't disappear.

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
http://imgur.com/ubkgClz
image.jpg
 
The fundamental laws of electromagnetism are the Maxwell equations in differential form.

Take as an example Gauss's Law for the electric field, here written in terms of macroscopic electrodynamics in Heaviside-Lorentz units
$$\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{D}=\rho$$
and consider the case of a boundary of some some surface. The singular piece in Gauss's Law is then a surface charge ##\sigma## (charge per unit area) which has a ##\delta##-distribution like singularity with respect to the direction perpendicular to the surface, while a usual "bulk" charge distribution ##\rho'## (charge per unit volume) is not more singular than perhaps a jump along the surface (e.g., a charged body in air or in a vacuum). Then you integrate along an infinitesimal box with two of its surfaces parallel to the surface, one on each side of the surface. Then using Gauss's integral theorem for such a box gives
$$\int_{\partial \delta V} \mathrm{d} \vec{F} \cdot \vec{D}=\vec{n} \delta F \cdot (\vec{D}_{>}-\vec{D}_{<})=\delta F \sigma + \delta F \delta x_{\perp} \rho'.$$
Now you divide by ##\delta F## and let ##\delta x \rightarrow 0##, which gives the boundary condition
$$\vec{n} \cdot (\vec{D}_{>}-\vec{D}_{<})=\sigma.$$
Above the symbols have the following meaning: ##\delta F## is the piece of the boundary of the infinitesimal box parallel to the surface under investigation, ##\vec{n}## is the unit vector perpendicular to the surface on one side (in Gauss's integral theorem it's always pointing out of the volume over which you integrate), then ##-\vec{n}## is the corresponding surface normal unit vector on the other side of the surface, and ##\vec{D}_{>}## and ##\vec{D}_{<}## are the values of ##\vec{D}## on the surface taken as limits from the one and the other side, respectively. Finally ##\delta x_{\perp}## is the infinitesimal height of the infinitesimal box perpendicular to the surface. As you see, the normal component of ##\vec{D}## jumps along the surface, and the size of this jump is given by the surface charge (charge per unit area), while the "bulk charge distribution" doesn't contribute.

The same technique shows that ##\vec{D}## itself has at most jumps. The only exception is the presence of a point charge (making a singularity in ##\rho## of the type ##\delta^{(3)}(\vec{x}-\vec{x}_0##) or a line-charge distribution (charge along a line with unit charge per length, where you have a ##\delta^{(2)}##-distribution-like singularity in ##\rho##), in which case you have singularities at the position of the point charge and along the charged line.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
548
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K