How does ∇ × J = 0 relate to B = 0 in Maxwell's equations?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between the curl of the current density vector field, ∇ × J = 0, and the magnetic field B = 0 within the context of Maxwell's equations and vector calculus.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the statement regarding current density and magnetic field, questioning the validity of the original proposition. Some participants provide counterexamples, such as the scenario involving a straight wire carrying current, to illustrate potential flaws in the statement.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants raising concerns about the accuracy of the original problem statement and suggesting alternative interpretations. Some guidance is offered regarding related properties, but no consensus has been reached on the correct formulation of the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem may be mis-stated and discuss the implications of steady currents on the magnetic field, indicating a need for clarification on the assumptions involved.

It's me
Messages
34
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Prove that a current density J(r, t) such that ∇ × J = 0 implies the magnetic field B = 0.

Homework Equations



Maxwell's equations, vector calculus

The Attempt at a Solution



I've played around with Maxwell's equations and with the properties of vector calculus but I can't reach the necessary conclusion. Any hints would be greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the problem may have been mis-stated because, as stated, it looks false.
Consider a point outside a long, straight wire carrying a steady, direct current. ∇ × J=0 at that point because J=0 in an open neighbourhood of that point. But B is not zero. It is a stable, nonzero field that runs around the wire.
The proposition fails inside the wire too: see these calcs.
 
Thank you very much, I had the feeling something was wrong when the math just didn't agree with the statement.
Do you know of any property that is similar to the one I was trying to prove? I mean, if the problem is mis-stated, any ideas as to what the correct statement is?
 
Given those conditions, if we also have ##\frac{\partial\mathbf{E}}{dt}=0##, which will for instance be correct if the current is steady, then we can deduce that ##\nabla^2\mathbf{B}=0##. Perhaps they meant that.
 
Ok thanks, I really appreciate your help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
814
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K