Instantaneous power at infinite distance from current element

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around deriving the instantaneous power passing through a sphere's surface centered on a current element carrying a time-varying current. The user is attempting to integrate the Poynting vector over the sphere's surface and take the limit as the radius approaches infinity to eliminate near-field effects. They expect to obtain a result proportional to I_{0}^2R_{r} cos^2({\omega}t), but instead, they are getting results that suggest a 90-degree phase shift between the current and the instantaneous power. Other participants clarify that in the far-field, the electric and magnetic fields are indeed in phase with each other but out of phase with the current, leading to the observed discrepancies in the calculations. The user seeks confirmation on whether their derivation contains an error or if the phase shift is a physical reality.
avjt
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

Consider a 'current element' of length 'dl' carrying a current of I_{0} cos ({\omega}t). I understand the computation of the electric and magnetic fields due to this current element at any point (r, \theta, \phi), the computation of the Poynting vector at that point, and how the radiation resistance R_{r} is derived from the time-averaged Poynting vector integrated over the surface of an enclosing sphere.

Now, I am trying to derive the instantaneous power passing through the surface of a sphere or radius 'r' centered at the current element (by integrating the Poynting vector directly over the surface of that sphere) and take the limit, at r\rightarrow\infty, so as to eliminate the effect of the near field entirely.

Given that the current is I_{0} cos ({\omega}t), I was expecting to get a result of I_{0}^2R_{r} cos^2({\omega}t). But I keep getting I_{0}^2R_{r} sin^2({\omega}t), or I_{0}^2R_{r} cos^2({\omega}t+{\pi}/2) if you like.

Am I making a mistake (if so, can anyone point me to the correct derivation)? Or is there really a 90-degree phase shift between the current and the instantaneous power (if so, can anyone suggest some kind of physical explanation)?

Can anyone help me out? Thanks...

Avijit
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't know what you are doing wrong. In the far-field, radiation is a transverse spherical traveling wave, not much different than the transverse plane waves we learn about in Freshman physics. The derivation of the instantaneous power of a radiated wave is nearly identical to that of plane wave. http://faculty.uml.edu/cbaird/95.658%282011%29/Lecture1.pdf"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
chrisbaird said:
I don't know what you are doing wrong. In the far-field, radiation is a transverse spherical traveling wave, not much different than the transverse plane waves we learn about in Freshman physics. The derivation of the instantaneous power of a radiated wave is nearly identical to that of plane wave. http://faculty.uml.edu/cbaird/95.658%282011%29/Lecture1.pdf"

Thanks Chris.

The problem I seem to be having is that, for the current element {\delta}{\ell} carrying a current I_{0} cos({\omega}t), I get far-field values of \vec{B}=-{\mu}_0 \frac{I_{0}\: {\delta}{\ell}\: sin({\theta})}{4{\pi}}(\frac {\omega} {cr})sin({\omega}t')\hat{\phi} and \vec{E}=-\frac {1} {{\epsilon}_0} \frac{I_{0}\: {\delta}{\ell}\: sin({\theta})}{4{\pi}}(\frac {\omega} {c^2 r})sin({\omega}t')\hat{\theta}, or, in other words, the electric and magnetic fields in the far field, though in phase with each other, seem to be 90-degree out of phase with the current (though the \frac {1} {r^2} terms in the near field are nicely in phase with the current).

Computing the Poynting vector for these values of the far field gives me \frac {1} {c\:{\epsilon}_0}(\frac{I_{0}\: {\delta}{\ell}}{4{\pi}})^2(\frac {\omega}{c \: r})^2 sin^2 {\theta} \: sin^2 ({\omega}t') \hat{r}, and the surface integral of this gets me to {I_{0}}^2 R_r\:sin^2 {\omega}t'

Do I have a mistake there?

Avijit
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
It may be shown from the equations of electromagnetism, by James Clerk Maxwell in the 1860’s, that the speed of light in the vacuum of free space is related to electric permittivity (ϵ) and magnetic permeability (μ) by the equation: c=1/√( μ ϵ ) . This value is a constant for the vacuum of free space and is independent of the motion of the observer. It was this fact, in part, that led Albert Einstein to Special Relativity.
Back
Top