Electric Dipole in the near field region CLOSE to the source

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the electric (E) and magnetic (B) fields for an electric dipole in the near field region, specifically when the distance from the source is much smaller than the wavelength (lambda >> r). Participants are exploring the differences in approach between the near field and far field scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the derivation of fields in the far field and question how to adapt those results for the near field. There are inquiries about the potential formulas and their implications for the E and B fields. Some participants suggest using the definitions of potential and vector potential to derive the fields directly.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing their derivations and questioning assumptions related to the transition from far field to near field. Some guidance has been offered regarding the use of potential and vector potential, but there is no explicit consensus on the best approach for the near field calculations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of the relationship between distance and wavelength in determining the behavior of the fields, with specific attention to the conditions for near field (kr << 1) versus far field (kr >> 1). There is also mention of the need for clarity on the definitions of various parameters used in the equations.

mrjimbo
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Hey everyone, I need to derive what the E and B fields look like for the electric dipole in the near field region close to the source i.e. lambda>>r.

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I managed to derive it for the situation far from the source but I'm not sure what adaptations to make for the close region.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How did you derive it for the far-field?
 
Hey Born2bwire,

Well I was given:

\varphi = [-p(0)\varpi/4\pi\epsilon(0)c] ( cos\theta/r ) sin[\varpi(t- r/c )]

and

A = [-\mu(0)p(0)\varpi/4\pir] sin[ \varpi (t - r/c )] z\widehat{}

From there I used the grad of Psi and curl of A and the unit vector z definition to get the E and B fields where:

E = -(grad Psi) - dA/dt
B = (curl of A)

Note:
Those omegas, pis, epsilons etc. aren't superscripts btw just multiply, it looks like they are superscripts in the preview.
 
Pls don't murder me if I am wrong but...

I know for far away fields if you have the definition of the potential as a function of (r, theta, t) you can use the constraints that as r>>lambda, the lambda is approx c/w therefore 1/lambda = w/c (approx). This means that you potential formula can be changed by replacing every w/c with 1/lambda.

This gives the potential at a distance, Which if you get -Div.(your potential) you get your E.

I think you get E going to zero the further you go! But for r<<lambda I am not to sure how it works out...

anybody advance on this for near E and B fields?
 
You should use the Tex now that it is working again.

If you were given the exact potential and vector potential then all you have to do is use them to find the fields and that is the near field. The only difference between the near and far field is that in the far field you assume kr\gg 1. In this case, I can see that the E field will have a 1/r^2 component from the gradient of the potential and then a 1/r component from the time derivative. So the far-field would keep the leading order term. You could assume the opposite, that kr\ll 1 for the near field and drop the appropriate terms but I can't recall that being done. It really would be a matter of preference, especially for such a simple equation as in this case.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
8K