How to Set Lower Limit for Intergration on Vector Magnetic Potential Problem

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the setup of limits for an integral in the context of calculating the vector magnetic potential \( \vec{A} \) at a distance \( s \) from an infinite long straight wire carrying a direct current \( I \). Participants are exploring the implications of choosing a lower limit \( b \) for the integral and its justification.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster questions the justification for using a constant \( b \) as the lower limit of the integral, noting that it cannot be zero. Some participants suggest that the choice of \( b \) relates to the arbitrary nature of potential and its impact on the magnetic field.
  • Others point out that the integral's limits must encompass the entire wire, indicating a need for clarity on the variable \( s \) and its representation in the context of the problem.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, with some providing insights into the nature of potential and the implications of the chosen limits. There is recognition of the arbitrary nature of the constant \( b \), but also a challenge regarding the completeness of the integral setup. Multiple interpretations of the integral's limits are being explored without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing discussion about the appropriateness of the integral limits, particularly in relation to the infinite extent of the wire and the representation of distance from it. The original poster's choice of variables and the implications of those choices are under scrutiny.

yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
291

Homework Statement


My question is mainly on the set up of the limits of the integral.

The original question is:

Find vector magnetic potential A distance s from a infinite long straight wire carrying DC current I.



The Attempt at a Solution




Let wire on z-axis and \vec I = \hat z I

\nabla \times \vec A = \vec B = \hat {\phi} \frac {\mu_0 I}{2\pi r}

We know A is same direction as I and is function of r in this case.

\nabla \times \vec A = \nabla \times \hat z A_{(r)}} = \hat {\phi} \frac {\partial A_{(r)}}{\partial r} = \hat {\phi} \frac {\mu_0 I}{2\pi r}

\Rightarrow\; \vec A_{(s)} = \frac {\mu_0 I}{2\pi} \int \frac 1 r dr

The book use

\vec A_{(s)} = \frac {\mu_0 I}{2\pi} \int^s_b \frac 1 r dr

Where b is a constant.

My question is how do you justify using b as the lower limit. I understand b cannot be zero. But how do you justify using b constant?

My main question is how do you set the lower limit in this case.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


I think it's just a case of the familiar idea that you can always add an arbitrary constant to the potential. The lower limit on the integral adds a constant to A, and since the derivative of a constant is 0, that doesn't affect the B field. So your last integral is the potential at radius s relative to some point b.
 


Mike Pemulis said:
I think it's just a case of the familiar idea that you can always add an arbitrary constant to the potential. The lower limit on the integral adds a constant to A, and since the derivative of a constant is 0, that doesn't affect the B field. So your last integral is the potential at radius s relative to some point b.

Thanks a lot, now I remember that I can choose any A as long as I can satisfy

\nabla \times \vec A =\vec B \;\hbox { and } \nabla \cdot \vec A = 0

and any b will satisfy this!

Thanks

Alan
 


b is just an arbitrary constant. You can easily show that whatever b happens to be, the equation curl A=B is still satisfied.

Incidentally, the book's solution is not the most general possible. You can add any curl-free field to it and get an expression that still satisfies curl(A)=B.
 


Oops, Mike already answered.
 


Your equation (and therefore your integral) are wrong.

Where is s?

The integral limits must run from - to + infinity along the wire.
 


Antiphon said:
Your equation (and therefore your integral) are wrong.

Where is s?


They don't. There's no s because the OP decided to use r to represent distance from the wire. His solution would be perfectly fine if he used s instead.

The integral limits must run from - to + infinity along the wire.

They don't. The indefinite integral solves curl(A)=B; a definite integral is equivalent to a constant, and would always have curl(A)=0.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K