Ohm's law and emf for non static electric fields

AI Thread Summary
Ohm's law remains applicable in non-stationary conditions, but the relationship between electric fields and currents becomes more complex due to time-dependent factors. In these scenarios, the equation can be expressed as J(r,t)=σE(J(r,t),B(r,t)), incorporating dependencies on the magnetic field. The electric field must be determined using Faraday's law of induction and Ampere's law, leading to more complicated differential equations. The definition of electromotive force (emf) also adapts to these changing conditions, although the fundamental principles still hold. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for studying electromagnetism in varying electric fields.
almarpa
Messages
94
Reaction score
3
Hello all.

I am currently studying electromagnetism with Griffiths' books, and I have already donde electrostatic and magnetostatics. Now I am reviewing Ohm's law en emf concepts, but I have a doubt:

In griffths book, when explaining ohm's law and emf, it seems to me that he assumes steady currents and electrostatic fields. So, ohm's law is defined as J(r)=σE(r), and emf is defined as the closed line integral of the non electrostatic force acting on the circuit.

But, what happens in non stationary conditions (time dependent elctric fields and currents)?

Does Ohms law still remain the same?
I mean, would this equation J(r,t)=σE(r,t) be correct?

, and regarding emf, if electric field is not stationary anymore, would emf be defined in the same way?

Regards.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Ohm's law still has to be the same. If it wasn't then a measured resistance could be time dependent.

Ohm's law is the same but in non stationary conditions the electric field has new dependencies on what the magnetic field is doing. You could define σE(r,t)=σE(J(r,t),B(r,t)) and then rewrite Ohm's law as J(r,t)=σE(J(r,t),B(r,t)). The right half there would require a solution for the electric field based on Faraday's law of induction and Ampere's law. It's still Ohm's law but now it's a real nasty differential equation.
 
Last edited:
OK, I see.

Thank you so much.

And, what about emf?

Regards.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
51
Views
8K
Replies
130
Views
13K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Back
Top