Magnetic vector and scalar potential

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the concepts of magnetic vector and scalar potentials in electromagnetism. It highlights the relationship between magnetic field intensity (H), magnetic flux density (B), and current density (J), emphasizing that a static magnetic field can exist even when J is zero. The participants express confusion about the existence and utility of scalar magnetic potential, suggesting it may be a convenience for calculations rather than a physical reality. They clarify that the vector magnetic potential (A) is defined through the curl operation, leading to the magnetic flux density (B). The conversation encourages further exploration of these concepts through textbooks and simulations for better understanding.
reddvoid
Messages
118
Reaction score
1
I understood that
curl H = J
H being magnetic field intensity and magnetic flux density B = u H (u being permeability of free space)
divergence of B is zero because isolated magnetic charge or pole doesn't exist.
but then they define magnetic scalar and vector potentials .i can imagine H and B like in terms of field lines but this scalar and vector potentials making me very uncomfortable.
They say H= - del Vm
(negative divergence of scalar potential) and this is valid only when current density J=0. What i undertood is, first of all static magnetic field is produced by constant current if current density is zero which is del I / del S then current is zero then how can magnetic field exist at first place.
And then they define magnetic vector potential (A) exist just because del . B =0(div of B =0) so B can be expressed as curl of some function since divergence of curl of a vector is zero . I understand this in terms of vector identities but m not able to imagine this magnetic vector potential.
Some body please explain this. Any link to a simulation or java applet will be very helpfull . . .
Thank u.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
My understanding is those scalar magnetic potential are fake terms that is used only to make it more convenient in certain calculation. They are trying to make it similar the scalar electric potential of \vec E=-\nabla V. It is not really existing. You only have vector magnetic potential A and \vec B =\nabla \times \vec A.

I never really study the scalar magnetic potential as it is not real.
 
ok. So how can vector magnitude potential be defined like in layman terms other than telling that curl of magnetic vector potential gives magnetic flux density.
 
I study EM but I am not an expert, but I don't think they ever explain in layman's term. It is more like because \nabla \cdot \vec B \equiv 0\;\; \Rightarrow \;\vec B \;\hbox { is solenoidal} \;\Rightarrow \vec B = \nabla \times \;\hbox { (a vector field).} This is the Helmholtz's Theorem. Google this and you'll have a better understanding of the irrotational and solenoidal. And they defined the vector field as "vector magnetic potential" A.

As I said, I am not an instructor nor expert, double check what I said. It should be easy to verify. Just look at your textbook and you should find it. This is basic static magnetics.
 
Last edited:
thanks a lot. . .Ill do that
:-)
 
I am trying to understand how transferring electric from the powerplant to my house is more effective using high voltage. The suggested explanation that the current is equal to the power supply divided by the voltage, and hence higher voltage leads to lower current and as a result to a lower power loss on the conductives is very confusing me. I know that the current is determined by the voltage and the resistance, and not by a power capability - which defines a limit to the allowable...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
12K