Magnetic Vector Potential prob 5.32 Griffiths

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on Problem 5.32 from Griffiths' textbook, which addresses the discontinuity in the normal derivative of the magnetic vector potential across a current-carrying surface. The key argument is that the magnetic vector potential, denoted as A, is continuous across the surface, leading to equal derivatives in the x and y directions on both sides of the boundary. This conclusion is supported by the application of Ampere's Law and the Coulomb-gauge constraint, which confirms the continuity of both tangential and normal components of the vector potential, while noting that the tangential components of the magnetic field exhibit a jump due to the presence of surface currents.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of magnetic vector potential and its role in electromagnetism.
  • Familiarity with Griffiths' "Introduction to Electrodynamics" and Problem 5.32.
  • Knowledge of calculus, particularly in relation to derivatives and integrals.
  • Basic grasp of Ampere's Law and the Coulomb-gauge condition.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of Ampere's Law and its application in magnetostatics.
  • Explore the implications of the Coulomb-gauge condition on vector potentials.
  • Review the mathematical treatment of discontinuities in vector fields.
  • Investigate the physical significance of surface currents in electromagnetic theory.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physics students, particularly those studying electromagnetism, as well as educators and researchers looking to deepen their understanding of magnetic vector potentials and boundary conditions in magnetostatics.

precise
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Please refer to the problem towards the end of page in the following link. It's related to discontinuity in normal derivative of magnetic vector potential across a current carrying surface. Prob 5.32 in Griffths.

http://physicspages.com/2013/04/08/magnetostatic-boundary-conditions/

The solution says "Since A is continuous across the surface, the derivatives in directions perpendicular to the surface (that is, {x} and {y}) will be the same on both sides."

I couldn't understand the above argument which says the derivatives along x and y are same across the boundary. What is the calculus I'm missing. Could you explain in detail, or suggest some reading for that math part I'm missing.

I found this thread, with same concern. It's still not clear why though.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=498682

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
While your weblink is a bit handwaving to my taste, it's very clearly written in Griffiths's book. The magnetic field has only a finite jump, not a more severe singularity. From
\vec{B}=\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{A}
you get for any surface F with boundary \partial F.
\int_F \mathrm{d}^2 \vec{F} \cdot \vec{B}=\int_{\partial F} \mathrm{d} \vec{x} \cdot \vec{A}.
By the usual arguments with an infinitesimal rectangle penetrating the surface perpendicularly and from the finiteness of \vec{B} along this rectangle you get that in the limit of a vanishing height the surface integral is 0 and so also the line integral over the vector potential. This implies that the tangential components of the vector potential must be continuous.

From the Coulomb-gauge constraint
\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{A}=0
it follows in a similar way by using Gauß's integral theorem that also the normal components of the vector potential are continuous across the surface.

The tangential components of the magnetic field, however must have a jump if a surface current is present as in Griffiths's example. This implies that the derivatives of \vec{A} must have these jumps since \vec{B}=\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{A}.

Now I'd go along as follows. Write down Ampere's Law for the above described infinitesimal square, which you orient such that its surface-normal vector is in direction of the surface current \vec{K}. Then you get
\mu I=\int_F \mathrm{d}^2 \vec{x} (\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{B})=-\int_F \mathrm{d}^2 \vec{x} \cdot \vec{\nabla}^2 \vec{A}.
This will immediately give
(\vec{n} \cdot \vec{\nabla}) \vec{A}=-\mu_0 \vec{K}.
You just have to work out the last integral above in the limit of an infinitesimal square!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
44
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K