Understanding Cylindrical Vector Fields: Can They Be Electrostatic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter taishar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    E&m
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on whether the given cylindrical vector field F can represent an electrostatic field. It is established that an electrostatic field must be curl-less, which can be verified by calculating the curl of F. If the curl is zero, it indicates that the field can be expressed as a gradient of a scalar potential, confirming its electrostatic nature. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding the relationship between curl and electrostatic fields. Overall, the key takeaway is that checking the curl is essential to determine if the vector field is electrostatic.
taishar
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I'm given this:

A vector field is given in cylindrical coordinates as:

F=(A)(s)(PhiHat) + (B)(z)(zhat)

Where A and B are constants. Could F be an electrostatic field ? Why or why not ?

I kind of feel stupid asking this because I feel like I should know, but, I'm currently braindead after having just spent hours doing the previous 29 problems.

Thanks,
Dan
 
Physics news on Phys.org
taishar said:
I'm given this:

A vector field is given in cylindrical coordinates as:

F=(A)(s)(PhiHat) + (B)(z)(zhat)

Where A and B are constants. Could F be an electrostatic field ? Why or why not ?

I kind of feel stupid asking this because I feel like I should know, but, I'm currently braindead after having just spent hours doing the previous 29 problems.

Thanks,
Dan


an electrostatic field should be curl-less.

so... take the curl and see if it's zero or not.
 
i guess i should provide some justification for my answer so that you'll believe me! :-p

an electrostatic field can be written in terms of a scalar potential:

<br /> \mathbf{E} = -\nabla V.<br />


and it is a mathematical fact that
<br /> \nabla \times \nabla V = 0<br />

for any V.


So if the curl is strictly zero, this implies that E can be expressed in terms of a scalar potential (and not have a vector potential term), and this is enough to determine if E is a static field or not.
 
Duh. I knew I was just being stupid. I had to do a couple similar problems earlier. Gah. Thanks a bunch :) Too many hours doing homework...
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top