Electric Flux: Is it an Integer or a Real Value?

AI Thread Summary
Electric flux is defined as the number of electric field lines passing through a given area, but it is not limited to integer values. The density of field lines represents the strength of the electric field, allowing for fractional values based on chosen calibrations, such as 1 field line equating to 1.3 N/C. Electric flux is calculated by integrating the density of field lines over an area, which can yield non-integer results, exemplified by a triangular area yielding 0.5 "field lines." Field lines serve as a useful conceptual tool for understanding electric fields, as they represent continuous streamlines rather than discrete points. Thus, electric flux can take on real values, reflecting the continuous nature of electric fields.
aniketp
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
I have a doubt about electric flux.
It is said to be the no. of field lines passing through a given area.
But then we integrate it as:
\int\vec{E}.\vec{ds}=\Phi
However, bein the number of field lines does it not have to be an integer?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, because "field lines" are not absolutely defined. They are merely streamlines of the E vector field, and their density represents the strength of the E field. So, you choose a particular "calibration" when you want to draw field lines; e.g., you might have 1 field line = 1 N/C, or you might have 1 field line = 1.5 N/C, etc., and you just draw the streamlines appropriately close together or far apart.

But if, say, your field strength at a particular point is 1.3 N/C, then this amounts to 1.3 "field lines" under some particular calibration -- a fractional number.

The electric field magnitude is proportional to the density of field lines at a particular point (i.e., field lines per area, taken as a limit as the area gets small). The electric flux is equal to the total field lines in a given area, which is simply integrating the density of lines over the area. It doesn't have to be an integer. For example, if your field lines in one particular place are a meter apart, and the area you're considering is a 45-90-45 triangle with base legs of 1 meter each, then the flux is 0.5 "field lines".

By the way, your formulas will be much more readable if you put the entire formula within one set of [ tex ][ /tex ] tags, rather than wrapping each character individually. For example, typing

[ tex ]\int \vec E \cdot \vec {ds} = \Phi[ /tex ]

will give you

\int \vec E \cdot \vec {ds} = \Phi
 
Last edited:
so are field lines just a vague concept developed for better intuitive understanding?
 
aniketp said:
so are field lines just a vague concept developed for better intuitive understanding?

No, they're very real; I mean, the E field definitely has streamlines. It's just that they're a continuous number rather than an integer number--you can draw a field line at any point in space; not just at a certain set of discrete points.
 
so it is just like where water has molecules but u can't count 'em.
I understood it now. Thanx.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top