FInd a simple expression for the vector potential which will yield this field

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
7 replies · 3K views
Nusc
Messages
752
Reaction score
2
em

Homework Statement



In a certain region, the magnetic field as a linear function of time is given by

[tex] B = Bo \frac{t}{/tau} z hat[/tex]
Bo and tau constants.

A)FInd a simple expression for the vector potential which will yield this field.
B)Assuming the scalar potential is a constant, find E from the above result for the vector potential. Check that your answer is consistent with the diff form of faradays law

Homework Equations


[tex] \nabla^2 \mathbf{A} - \mu_0 \epsilon_0 \frac{\partial^2 \mathbf{A}}{\partial t^2} = -\mu_0 \mathbf{J}[/tex]

[tex] \mathbf{A} = \frac{\mu_0}{4 \pi} \int \frac{\mathbf{J}(\mathbf{rsingle-quote},t_r)}{\cal{R}} d\tausingle-quote[/tex]

[tex] t_r \equiv t - \frac{\cal{R}}{c}[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



[tex] B= \nabla \times A [/tex]

We take the curl of B on the LHS and on the RHS we have
[tex] \nabla \times (\nabla \times A )[/tex]

Eventually we will get to this [tex] \nabla^2 \mathbf{A} - \mu_0 \epsilon_0 \frac{\partial^2 \mathbf{A}}{\partial t^2} = -\mu_0 \mathbf{J}[/tex]This is assuming were in the Lorentz Gauge, we don't know if we are. Or do we assume we are? We have to satisfy E = -delV -dA/dt but we don't know either of those quantities.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
say if

kt y-hat = K x xhat

What mathematical operation would I apply to show that
K = kt z-hat

I don't thin kthat is even relevant
 
Last edited:
A) Take curl(BXr)/2 and see what you get.
 
Nusc said:

Homework Statement



In a certain region, the magnetic field as a linear function of time is given by

[tex] B = Bo \frac{t}{/tau} z hat[/tex]
Bo and tau constants.

A)FInd a simple expression for the vector potential which will yield this field.
B)Assuming the scalar potential is a constant, find E from the above result for the vector potential. Check that your answer is consistent with the diff form of faradays law

Homework Equations


[tex] \nabla^2 \mathbf{A} - \mu_0 \epsilon_0 \frac{\partial^2 \mathbf{A}}{\partial t^2} = -\mu_0 \mathbf{J}[/tex]

[tex] \mathbf{A} = \frac{\mu_0}{4 \pi} \int \frac{\mathbf{J}(\mathbf{rsingle-quote},t_r)}{\cal{R}} d\tausingle-quote[/tex]

[tex] t_r \equiv t - \frac{\cal{R}}{c}[/tex]


The Attempt at a Solution



[tex] B= \nabla \times A [/tex]

We take the curl of B on the LHS and on the RHS we have
[tex] \nabla \times (\nabla \times A )[/tex]

Eventually we will get to this [tex] \nabla^2 \mathbf{A} - \mu_0 \epsilon_0 \frac{\partial^2 \mathbf{A}}{\partial t^2} = -\mu_0 \mathbf{J}[/tex]


This is assuming were in the Lorentz Gauge, we don't know if we are. Or do we assume we are? We have to satisfy E = -delV -dA/dt but we don't know either of those quantities.

The simples way to go about this is to simply write explicitly [tex] B= \nabla \times A [/tex]
in cartesian coordinates.

You will get simple equations for A_x, A_y and A_z. It should be easy to pick functions A-x, A_y, A_z that satisfy those equations. You don't need anything else.
 
nrqed said:
The simples way to go about this is to simply write explicitly [tex] B= \nabla \times A [/tex]
in cartesian coordinates.

You will get simple equations for A_x, A_y and A_z. It should be easy to pick functions A-x, A_y, A_z that satisfy those equations. You don't need anything else.

Doing this would only yield

dA_y/dx - dA_x/dy = Bo(t/tau) since B has only z-components.

Solving this differential equation would still give unknown A_y A_x.

There should be an explicit way of doing this, no?
 
Remember that the vector potential is not physically different even if you add a gradient of a function. So you have a certain freedom available to pick the solution.
 
Nusc said:
Doing this would only yield

dA_y/dx - dA_x/dy = Bo(t/tau) since B has only z-components.

Solving this differential equation would still give unknown A_y A_x.

There should be an explicit way of doing this, no?

Of course A is defined up to gauge transformations only so many different A's give the same physics. This is why the question asks you to find a simple expression for A. Just pick the simplest A that yields the correct B

(don't forget to make sure that the other components of the equation also work)
 
OKay problem solved. You can close this thread.