Finding a vector from the curl of a vector

user1139
Messages
71
Reaction score
8
Consider the following

\begin{equation}
\nabla\phi=\nabla\times \vec{A}.
\end{equation}

Is it possible to find ##\vec{A}## from the above equation and if so, how does one go about doing so?

[Moderator's note: moved from a homework forum.]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Thomas1 said:
Consider the following

\begin{equation}
\nabla\phi=\nabla\times \vec{A}.
\end{equation}

Is it possible to find ##\vec{A}## from the above equation and if so, how does one go about doing so?

[Moderator's note: moved from a homework forum.]
What do you get if you write this in components?
 
Working with Cartesian coordinates, I will be able to equate the respective components on the LHS and RHS. The problem comes when I want to find ##A_x##, ##A_y## and ##A_z## since the equations are now coupled.
 
Thomas1 said:
Working with Cartesian coordinates, I will be able to equate the respective components on the LHS and RHS. The problem comes when I want to find ##A_x##, ##A_y## and ##A_z## since the equations are now coupled.
Yes, but it is still a linear equation system.
 
Do you know how to solve it? I ran out of ideas.
 
You have ##c_1=z-y\, , \,c_2=x-z\, , \,c_3=y-x## which is ##\begin{bmatrix}
0&-1&1\\1&0&-1\\-1&1&0
\end{bmatrix}\cdot \begin{bmatrix}
x\\y\\z\end{bmatrix}=\begin{bmatrix}
c_1\\c_2\\c_3
\end{bmatrix}##
so invert the matrix and solve it. Of course you only get ##x\triangleq\dfrac{\partial A_1}{\partial x_1} ,\ldots##
 
The matrix is singular and hence, cannot be inverted.
 
Thomas1 said:
The matrix is singular and hence, cannot be inverted.
Then you cannot get ##A.##
 
Thomas1 said:
Consider the following

\begin{equation}
\nabla\phi=\nabla\times \vec{A}.
\end{equation}

Is it possible to find ##\vec{A}## from the above equation and if so, how does one go about doing so?

[Moderator's note: moved from a homework forum.]

Let A = \nabla \times F + \nabla \psi. Then <br /> \nabla \times A = \nabla(\nabla \cdot F) - \nabla^2F = \nabla \phi. Adding a gradient to F does not change its curl, which is all we care about, but does change its divergence, so we can assume \nabla \cdot F = 0. That results in F satisfying Poisson's equation <br /> \nabla^2 F = - \nabla \phi. This is three decoupled equations in the cartesian components of F. There is no way to determine \psi since \nabla^2 \psi = \nabla \cdot A is not specified.
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK
  • #10
If there is any hope, I think you would also need some boundary conditions.
 
  • #11
There is an integral solution to ## \nabla \times A =\nabla \phi ##. It is basically a Biot-Savart integral type solution to ## \nabla \times B=\mu_o J ##, to solve for ##B ##. There is also the possibility of a homogeneous solution, (## \nabla \times A=0 ##), so that the solution for ## A ## is not unique by this method.
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK
  • #12
To write out the above Biot-Savart type solution, ## A(x)=\int \frac{\nabla \phi \times (x-x')}{4 \pi |x-x'|^3} \, d^3x' ##, where ##x ## and ## x' ## are 3 dimensional coordinate vectors.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top