Electromagnetic field strength

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the distinction between the strength of electrostatic and magnetostatic fields, which diminish with distance as 1/r², and the behavior of electromagnetic fields, which can fall off as 1/r under certain conditions. Specifically, the Lienard-Wiechert potential describes how accelerating charges produce electromagnetic fields that propagate with a 1/r dependence. This phenomenon is linked to the energy carried away by the fields, where the intensity of the wave is proportional to the square of the amplitude, resulting in a 1/r² intensity law despite the 1/r field strength. References to the Larmor formula and the Lienard-Wiechert potential provide foundational insights into these concepts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Coulomb's Law
  • Familiarity with the Biot-Savart Law
  • Knowledge of Lienard-Wiechert potentials
  • Basic principles of electromagnetic wave propagation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Lienard-Wiechert potential in detail
  • Explore the derivation of the Larmor formula
  • Investigate the relationship between electromagnetic fields and energy propagation
  • Learn about wave intensity and amplitude in electromagnetic theory
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, electrical engineers, and students of electromagnetism seeking to deepen their understanding of electromagnetic field behavior and its implications in various physical contexts.

roboticmehdi
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
hello world. it is know that electrostatic (coulomb's law) and magnetostatic (biot-savart law) fields lose their strength like 1/r^2. why do they say that electromagnetic field falls like 1/r ? is that true ? if yes how, can you explain please ? after all energy radiated from a point source must fall like 1/r^2, because the area of surface of a sphere increases like r^2.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
roboticmehdi said:
why do they say that electromagnetic field falls like 1/r ?
Can you provide a reference for this? It is hard to say one way or the other without knowing the details.
 
DaleSpam said:
Can you provide a reference for this? It is hard to say one way or the other without knowing the details.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larmor_formula there in the part ''Derivation 2: Using Edward M. Purcell approach'' it says stuff related to this.
 
Both Coulomb's law and the Biot-Savart law are approximations for 0 velocity and 0 acceleration respectively. The full general field produced by a point charge moving with arbitrary velocity and acceleration is given by the Lienard Wiechert potential:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liénard–Wiechert_potential

If you look at the formula for the LW fields you see that for a stationary charge you get a 0 B field and a 1/r² E field, corresponding with Coulomb's law. If you look at the formula for the LW fields for a moving but not accelerating charge you get a 1/r² B field, corresponding with the Biot-Savart law. However, if you look at the formula for an accelerating charge you also get a 1/r E and a 1/r B field.
 
One way to shed light on this is to note that the 1/r fields (unlike the 1/r2 fields) are propagating away from the source, carrying energy with them. In a wave, the intensity (energy per unit time per unit normal area) is proportional to the square of the amplitude, so to 1/r2 for the 1/r propagating field. But this 1/r2 intensity law is just what we get by assuming energy not to be lost from the wave as it propagates outwards through larger and larger spherical surfaces – whose areas are proportional to r2.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K