Find the magnetic field of an infinite uniform surface

BREAD
Messages
50
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


234234-png.90190.png

This example is from 3rd edition of Griffiths' textbook. Ex. 5.8 on page 226
I understand that by reversing the direction of the current, sign of B is switched. but i can't get it that highlighted part. and why B doesn't have z-component?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
BREAD said:

Homework Statement


234234-png.90190.png

This example is from 3rd edition of Griffiths' textbook. Ex. 5.8 on page 226
I understand that by reversing the direction of the current, sign of B is switched. but i can't get it that highlighted part. and why B doesn't have z-component?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


Think about what would happen if we rotated the coordinate system. Originally the current was in the +x direction, but we rotate our original coordinate system -90 degrees around the z-axis so that now the flow of K is in the +y direction. The z-component of B wouldn't change, correct?

Now if we changed the direction of the flow of current in the plane, it is analogous to the rotation above. The z-component of B can't change by simply changing where we define x and y. Therefore there is no z-component of B.
 
LunaFly said:
Think about what would happen if we rotated the coordinate system. Originally the current was in the +x direction, but we rotate our original coordinate system -90 degrees around the z-axis so that now the flow of K is in the +y direction. The z-component of B wouldn't change, correct?

Now if we changed the direction of the flow of current in the plane, it is analogous to the rotation above. The z-component of B can't change by simply changing where we define x and y. Therefore there is no z-component of B.
2342323.PNG


But the current flow in the infinite plane. if i draw a lot of loops as seen in the picture,
i think B is canceled out and entire B can not be existed , what is wrong with my thought??
 
The magnetic field beneath the plane of current travels in the opposite direction of that above the plane (use the right hand rule... above the plane, B is in the -y direction, and below the plane, B is in the +y direction). Thus when using Biot-Savart Law, the integral around the loop is the sum of the field above the plane times the length l plus the field below the plane times l (the vertical edges have no contribution). Notice that both above the plane and below the plane, the magnetic field B is in the same direction as the path ds. Therefore the fields will not cancel; they will add.
 
LunaFly said:
The magnetic field beneath the plane of current travels in the opposite direction of that above the plane (use the right hand rule... above the plane, B is in the -y direction, and below the plane, B is in the +y direction). Thus when using Biot-Savart Law, the integral around the loop is the sum of the field above the plane times the length l plus the field below the plane times l (the vertical edges have no contribution). Notice that both above the plane and below the plane, the magnetic field B is in the same direction as the path ds. Therefore the fields will not cancel; they will add.
thank you. i got it !
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top