Magnetic Flux Q: How Is Flux Independent of Surface?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of magnetic flux and its independence from the surface used for its calculation. Participants explore the definition of magnetic flux and the implications of different surfaces fitting a given boundary line.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants examine the definition of magnetic flux as a surface integral and question how it can remain constant across different surfaces. They discuss the conditions under which magnetic flux is independent of the surface, particularly referencing the divergence of the magnetic field.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants engaging in clarifying the relationship between magnetic flux and the surfaces used in its calculation. Some guidance has been offered regarding the conditions that allow for the independence of flux from surface choice, particularly through the application of Stokes' theorem.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing exploration of the assumptions related to the divergence of the magnetic field and its implications for the definition of magnetic flux.

Reshma
Messages
749
Reaction score
6
This question might seem rather naive.
We define the magentic flux through a loop by [itex]\Phi = \int \vec B \cdot d\vec a[/itex]. But an infinite number of different surfaces can be fitted to a given boundary line...so how is the flux independent of the nature of the surface used?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In general, flux isn't defined through a loop (to my knowlegde), it is always defined through a surface. (It's a surface integral). Different surfaces bounding the same loop will in general give different answers.

Exception: If the divergence of the field F is zero everywhere:[itex]\vec \nabla \cdot \vec F =0[/itex], then we can write [itex]\vec F=\vec \nabla \times <br /> \vec A[/itex] for some field A. Now you can use Stokes' theorem to prove that for a given boundary line, the flux is independent of the surface bounded by that line. Since div B=0 always and everywhere, you can unambigously talk about the magnetic flux through a loop (although I would still never say 'flux through a loop')
 
Thanks for the reply.
So, that means [itex]\vec \nabla \cdot \vec B = 0[/itex] guarantees that [itex]\int \vec B \cdot d\vec a[/itex] is the same for all surfaces within a given boundary?
 
Yes...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K