Finding Vector potential due to an infinite cylinder?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the challenge of determining the vector potential due to an infinite cylinder with a uniform current density. Participants express confusion over the problem's requirements, debating whether it is necessary to derive the magnetic field B from the vector potential A or if B should be known beforehand. Some argue that the problem is overly complex for a second-year physics course, suggesting it may be impractical or redundant. The consensus leans towards the idea that solving for A in this context is significantly difficult, potentially rendering the exercise pointless. Overall, the thread highlights the complexities involved in electromagnetic theory and the challenges faced by students in understanding vector potentials.
BeerScience
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi there,
2nd year student, absolutely stumped on this don't even know where to begin.

"Determine the vector potential due to an infinite cylinder of radius, R, carrying a uniform current
density, j. Use this to describe the magnetic field inside a current carrying wire

I am using this article
http://galileo.math.siu.edu/mikesullivan/Courses/251/S12/vpot.pdf
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Unfortunately, in your link F is already given & they want you to find the vector potential of F.

In your problem on the other hand B is not given, it is to be derived from the vector potential: B = del x A where A is the vector potential.

There is an integral expression for finding A, given the current distribution and the location of the point where A and B are to be determined. What is it?

Warning: this looks to be a tough problem!
 
rude man said:
In your problem on the other hand B is not given, it is to be derived from the vector potential: B = del x A where A is the vector potential.
That's not how I read the question. It does ask for the vector potential, so the cited paper could be useful. The missing part is that you need to compute the vector field first by some other means.
 
haruspex said:
That's not how I read the question. It does ask for the vector potential, so the cited paper could be useful. The missing part is that you need to compute the vector field first by some other means.

I guess we just don't read the same way.

If you can cheat and get B first, which is a piece of cake here obviously, then what would be the point of describing the B field ex post facto using the vector potential?
 
rude man said:
what would be the point of describing the B field ex post facto using the vector potential?
The question does not ask for that to be done. It asks us to find a vector potential (by whatever means).
 
haruspex said:
The question does not ask for that to be done. It asks us to find a vector potential (by whatever means).

Yes, and then use it to describe the B field which you have already found? Ho ho ho.

I do have to admit, the problem as I read it is prohibitively difficult, so maybe it is just an exercise in redundancy.
 
Thanks for your help guys. I couldn't find an answers. Turns out heaps of guys in my class couldn't get it. Do you think this is too advanced for a second year physics degree?
 
BeerScience said:
Thanks for your help guys. I couldn't find an answers. Turns out heaps of guys in my class couldn't get it. Do you think this is too advanced for a second year physics degree?

Here's the thing. If haruspex is right and the only intent is to find the vector potential A with B already known, then you could solve the DE B = del x A, similar to what was in your link.

However, this is redundant nonsense. The reason A is solved for in the first place is to facilitate solving for B! And as I said, solving for A given the geometry and current density distribution is in this case horribly hard. I mean, very if not too hard even for an advanced e & m course. So to sum up I would say yes, this question is either pointless or impossible to solve.
 
Back
Top