Is it theoretically possible to create any electric field

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the theoretical possibility of creating any electric field represented by a vector field V(x, y, z) in three-dimensional space. It references Helmholtz's theorem, which states that under certain conditions, a vector field can be decomposed into a curl-free and a divergence-free component. The conversation explores how to achieve this decomposition to construct an electric field from charge density and changes in the magnetic field. Additionally, it highlights the need for understanding the mathematical conditions required for the Helmholtz theorem to apply, particularly regarding the smoothness of the fields involved. Overall, the feasibility of generating any electric field through this method is affirmed, contingent on adhering to the theorem's constraints.
HGTy
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
So given any vector field V(x, y, z) in three dimensional space, is it possible to create an electric field that is described by V.
Someone told me that according to Helmholtz theorem, a vector field (with certain constrains) can be expressed as a sum of a curless field and a divergenceless field. To me since charge density is basically the divergence of the electric field, and change in B field creates curl in electric field, it should be possible to create any electric field with these two elements. The procedure would be: given V, decompose it into a curless field and a divergenceless field; then put electric charges in space such that the charge density is described by the divergenceless field at all points; similary, do the same with ∂B/∂t at each point to create curl in E field that is described by the curless field; since E field obeys the superposition principle, everything should add and the resulting E field would be V.

Now the thing is I'm not familiar with Helmholtz theorem and the conditions it requires. Can someone clarify?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think, it doesn't help you much mixing a purely mathematical theorem with an electromagnetic interpretation. So let's first look at the purely mathematical theorem. The statement is that there exists a rotation free field \vec{V}_1 and a solenoidal (source-free) field \vec{V}_2 such that

\vec{V}=\vec{V}_1+\vec{V}_2.

To prove this, you assume that the fields go to 0 sufficiently quickly for \vec{x} \rightarrow \infty and you look at simply connected regions in space.

Then there must exist a scalar field \Phi and a vector field \vec{A} such that

\vec{V}_1=-\vec{\nabla} \Phi, \quad \vec{V}_2=\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{A}.

Obviously, with these ansatzes, you have

\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{V}_1=0, \quad \vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{V}_2=0.

It's also clear that \vec{A} is only determined up to the gradient of a scalar field, which we shall use below to simplify the determination of the vector potential.

Putting our ansatz into the statement of the theorem, we find

\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{V}=\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{V}_1=-\Delta \Phi.

Now you should invoke your electromagnetic knowledge. Just use the Green's function for the Laplacian to find the solution

\Phi(\vec{x})=\frac{1}{4 \pi} \int \mathrm{d}^3 \vec{x}' \frac{\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{V}(\vec{x}')}{|\vec{x}-\vec{x}'|}.

On the other hand you have

\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{V}=\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{V}_2=\vec{\nabla} \times (\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{A})=\vec{\nabla}(\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{A})-\Delta \vec{A}.

It should be kept in mind that the latter step is valid only in Cartesian coordinates. Now we can choose a special gauge by setting the constraint

\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{A}=0,

which can always be achieved by adding an appropriate gradient field to \vec{A}, and \vec{V}_2=\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{A} doesn't depend on any such gradient field. With this gauge contraint we have

\Delta \vec{A}=-\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{V},

for which again you can immediately write the solution, using the Green's function,

\vec{A}(\vec{x})=\frac{1}{4 \pi} \int \mathrm{d}^3 \vec{x}' \frac{\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{V}(\vec{x}')}{|\vec{x}-\vec{x}'|}.

You should read about this in some math book on vector calculus. There, you find more careful statements on the conditions (smoothness) on the fields, for which the Helmholtz-decomposition theorem holds.
 
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.

Similar threads

Back
Top