Find expression for electric field from magnetic field

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the electric field expression from a given magnetic field that varies with the z-coordinate. The magnetic field is defined as B = j B0 cos(kz - ωt), and the electric field in Cartesian coordinates is expressed as E = i Ex + j Ey + k Ez, with Ey and Ez initially set to zero. A participant identifies a mistake in the assumption of Ez being both zero and non-zero, clarifying that Ez should equal (ωB0)/k. The conversation concludes with a suggestion to use the equation ∇×B = μ0ε0∂E/∂t to solve for the electric field, given the absence of currents.
charlief
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


In a region of space, the magnetic field depends on the co-ordinate ##z## and is given by $$\mathbf{B} = \hat{\jmath} B_0 \cos \left(kz - \omega t \right)$$ where ##k## is the wave number, ##\omega## is the angular frequency, and ##B_0## is a constant.
The Electric Field in Cartesian coordinates is ##\mathbf{E} = \hat{\imath} E_x + \hat{\jmath} E_y + \hat{k} E_z##. Given that ##E_y = E_z = 0## and ##E_z = \omega B_0/k## at ##z = t = 0##, determine an expression for ##E_x##.

Homework Equations



##\nabla \times \mathbf{E} = -\frac{\partial \mathbf{B}}{\partial t}##

The Attempt at a Solution


Using the cross product rule, I changed ##\nabla \times \mathbf{E} = -\frac{\partial \mathbf{B}}{\partial t}## to ##-\frac{\partial \mathbf{B}}{\partial t} \times \nabla = \mathbf{E}##. Calculated ## -\frac{\partial \mathbf{B}}{\partial t} = -\hat{\jmath} B_0\omega\sin(kz - \omega t)##. Then working out the cross product I got ##\mathbf{E} = \hat{\imath} \frac{\partial}{\partial z}[-B_0\omega\sin(kz - \omega t)] = -\hat{\imath} B_0 k \omega \cos(k z - \omega t)##. So inputting ##z = t = 0## clearly gives ##B_0 \omega k## instead of ## \omega B_0 / k##.

I cannot see where in my method I have gone wrong and I am not sure this method is correct?
Thank you so much
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you say that E_{z}=0 and then E_{z}=(\omega B_{0})/k. You can't say that the z component of electric field is zero and non zero at the same time... clear that confusion then I'll solve your problem.
 
AhmirMalik said:
Why do you say that E_{z}=0 and then E_{z}=(\omega B_{0})/k. You can't say that the z component of electric field is zero and non zero at the same time... clear that confusion then I'll solve your problem.
Apologies it was a typo, I meant "##E_y = E_z = 0## and ##E_x = (\omega B_0)/k##"
 
Oh.. then you just have to use this;

\vec{\nabla}\times \vec{B}=\mu_{0}\vec{J}+\mu_{0}\epsilon_{0}\frac{\partial \vec{E}}{\partial t}

Since you don't have any currents, so first term on the right hand side is zero, so you are left with;

\vec{\nabla}\times \vec{B}=\mu_{0}\epsilon_{0}\frac{\partial \vec{E}}{\partial t}

which is easy to solve.
 
  • Like
Likes charlief
AhmirMalik said:
Oh.. then you just have to use this;

\vec{\nabla}\times \vec{B}=\mu_{0}\vec{J}+\mu_{0}\epsilon_{0}\frac{\partial \vec{E}}{\partial t}

Since you don't have any currents, so first term on the right hand side is zero, so you are left with;

\vec{\nabla}\times \vec{B}=\mu_{0}\epsilon_{0}\frac{\partial \vec{E}}{\partial t}

which is easy to solve.
AhmirMalik said:
Oh.. then you just have to use this;

\vec{\nabla}\times \vec{B}=\mu_{0}\vec{J}+\mu_{0}\epsilon_{0}\frac{\partial \vec{E}}{\partial t}

Since you don't have any currents, so first term on the right hand side is zero, so you are left with;

\vec{\nabla}\times \vec{B}=\mu_{0}\epsilon_{0}\frac{\partial \vec{E}}{\partial t}

which is easy to solve.
Thank you very much!
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top