Magnetic field of an infinite current sheet : Amperes law

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The magnetic field of an infinite current sheet can be accurately determined using Ampère's Law, specifically by recognizing that the surface current is represented by \(\vec{K}\) rather than \(\vec{J}\). The integral \(\int \vec{J} \cdot d\vec{s}\) should be correctly interpreted as \(\int \vec{J} \cdot d\vec{l}\) when defining the appropriate coordinate system, ensuring that the loop is drawn perpendicular to the current. This approach reveals that the magnetic field is perpendicular to the surface current, and symmetry arguments confirm that there is no field component perpendicular to the plane of the current sheet.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Ampère's Law and its application to magnetic fields
  • Familiarity with vector calculus, particularly line and surface integrals
  • Knowledge of coordinate systems in physics
  • Concept of symmetry in electromagnetic fields
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of Ampère's Law in different geometries
  • Learn about the right-hand rule and its implications in electromagnetism
  • Explore the concept of surface currents and their effects on magnetic fields
  • Investigate the role of symmetry in simplifying electromagnetic problems
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, electrical engineers, and students studying electromagnetism who seek to deepen their understanding of magnetic fields generated by current distributions.

Nyasha
Messages
127
Reaction score
0
I was asked to find the magnetic field of an infinite current sheet due to amperes law. Is my attempt to the solution correct ? The final answer is correct, but l am doubtful of how l got there.
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
1. This is a surface current, so it would be represented by \vec{K} not \vec{J}.
2. How did \int\vec{J} \cdot d\vec{s} turn into \int\vec{J} \cdot d\vec{l}. d\vec{l} is a line element around the circuit, while d\vec{s} is an area element of the enclosed surface. You can't turn one into the other.
3. It helps to define a coordinate system, this way you can loose d\vec{l} in favor of \hat{x}dx, \hat{y}dy, or \hat{z}dz, and the same for d/vec{s}. This is will avoid confusion when trying to determine \vec{B}\cdot d\vec{l}. d/vec{l} is pointing in the opposite direction along C_2, not that
4. This is the most important part. The way you drew the loop, \vec{J}\cdot d/vec{s}=0. What that tells you is that there is no field parallel to the current.
5. The way you should have drawn the loop is so that the loop is perpendicular to the current. Then \vec{J}\cdot d\vec{s}=Kda and \int\vec{J}\cdot d\vec{s}=Kl. This tells you that the field is perpendicular to the surface current.
6. You can't assume that the field is parallel to the plane, so the C2 and C3 integrals aren't necessarily 0. What happens is that the fields are the same along both lines, but because they are in opposite directions, they cancel.

I have a few more things to say, but my laptop is running out of power, I'll continue in the morning.
 
7. You say B_1l=-B_2l but offer no explanation. The explanation is that, by the right hand rule, the components of the fields parallel to the plane and perpendicular to the current have opposite signs and symmetry says they have to have equal magnitudes.
8. You have to argue that by symmetry that there is no field perpendicular to the plane because there the uniform current distribution will cancel out everything except the component parallel to the plate and perpendicular to the the current.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K