Finding the magnetic field of an infinite cylindrical wire.

ghostfolk
Messages
58
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


An infinite cylindrical wire of radius ##R## carries a current per unit area ##\vec{J}## which varies with the distance from the axis as ##J(s)=ks^2\hat{z}## for ##0<s<R## and zero otherwise where k is a constant.
Find the magnetic field ##\vec{B(s)}## in all space.

Homework Equations


##\oint B \cdot dl=\mu_0I_{enc}##
##\nabla \times B=\mu_0 \vec{J}##

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
##\oint B \cdot dl=B2\pi s##, ##I_{enc}=
\Bigg\{
\begin{array}{lr}
\frac{\pi ks^4\hat{z}}{2}, 0<s<R\\
\frac{\pi k R^4\hat{z}}{2},s \ge R
\end{array}##
So,
##\vec{B}=
\Bigg\{
\begin{array}{lr}
\frac{ks^3\hat{z}]\mu_0}{4}, 0<s<R\\
\frac{kR^4\hat{z}\mu_0}{4s}, s \ge R
\end{array}##.
However, when I calculate the curl of ##\vec{B}##, I don't get back ##\vec{J}##. Where am I wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For one thing, ##\vec{B}## doesn't point in the ##\hat{z}## direction.
 
vela said:
For one thing, ##\vec{B}## doesn't point in the ##\hat{z}## direction.
It's radially isn't it?
 
No. You must have seen figures depicting the magnetic field around a wire in your book, right? Use the right-hand rule to determine the direction.
 
vela said:
No. You must have seen figures depicting the magnetic field around a wire in your book, right? Use the right-hand rule to determine the direction.
Okay. So if I use ##\vec{J} \times \vec{r}## to find the direction of the magnetic field inside the wire, then the magnetic field should be in the ##\hat{\phi}## direction?
 
Yup.
 
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