On what empirical laws are Maxwell equations based?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the empirical foundations of Maxwell's equations, exploring how these equations relate to observed physical laws and experimental results. Participants examine the origins of specific laws, such as Faraday's law of induction, and the derivation of Maxwell's equations from other physical principles.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the equation ∇*B= 0 is based on the observation of the absence of magnetic monopoles.
  • Others argue that Faraday's law of induction lacks a clear empirical foundation and may be considered an empirical law in itself.
  • A participant notes that Maxwell formulated Faraday's law based on his own mathematical interpretation of Faraday's experimental results, suggesting no pre-existing law fit the description.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that the equations can be derived from the Lagrangian formulation, emphasizing the need for gauge invariance and the construction of the Faraday tensor.
  • One participant presents a method of deriving Maxwell's equations using Coulomb's law, Lorentz force, Biot-Savart law, and Faraday-Neumann law, asserting that these laws can lead to the equations under certain conditions.
  • Concerns are raised about the applicability of certain equations only in stationary cases, with a desire for clarification on the empirical basis of the time-varying terms in Maxwell's equations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the empirical basis of Maxwell's equations and the origins of specific laws, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on specific interpretations of physical laws and mathematical formulations, and there are unresolved questions regarding the derivation of certain terms in Maxwell's equations.

Earthland
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
For example, it could be said that the equation ∇*B= 0 is based on the observation that there are no magnetic monopoles.

But for Faraday's law of induction, it is easy to derive it from other equations but it's hard to say on what empirical law it is based. Could it be said that it is itself an empirical law and definition of it shall suffice?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Earthland, The simple answer is that Maxwell determined the mathematical form of Faraday's law of induction himself. There was no pre-existing law or mathematical expression that fit. Faraday expressed his experimental results and theoretical ideas in a sort of quasi-mathematical text description. Maxwell quantified Faraday's description and brought it into agreement with other EM dynamical expressions.

Of course, Maxwell used all of the physical and mathematical skills and knowledge at his disposal (such as Lagrangian analysis) to ensure that all of EM could be described consistently. So Maxwell's equations are not purely empirical.
 
The equations kind of suggest themselves in the lagrangian formulation, Einstein gravity by A. Zee has a really nice section on this.
Essentially when you are coupling a vector field to a particle you need to find a lagrangian to describe the dynamics of the vector field.Taking gauge invariance into account you have to form a "curl" on the four potential to get a gauge invariant object, this is the faraday tensor. Then you just do what comes natural and contract the faraday tensor on itself. Varying this will give you maxwells equations.
 
PhilDSP said:
Hi Earthland, The simple answer is that Maxwell determined the mathematical form of Faraday's law of induction himself. There was no pre-existing law or mathematical expression that fit. Faraday expressed his experimental results and theoretical ideas in a sort of quasi-mathematical text description. Maxwell quantified Faraday's description and brought it into agreement with other EM dynamical expressions.

For some comments on Faraday's "lines of force" and their connection with Maxwell's theory:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_of_force
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Physical_Lines_of_Force
 
in my opinion a very coerent way is to derive everything by coulomb force, lorentz force, biot savart and faraday-neumann. For example, using only biot savart you can see that you can express B with a vector potential:
[tex]\vec B = \nabla\wedge\vec A[/tex]
and you know that the div of a rotor is alwais 0, so you can obtain the third maxwell equation:
[tex]\nabla\cdot \vec B =0[/tex]
The first equation of maxwell [tex]\nabla\cdot \vec D=\rho[/tex] is a consequence of Gauss theorem, that come by the fact that E is poportional to the inverse of the square of the distance by the source.
The second is [ŧex] \nabla \wedge \vec E=-\frac{\partial B}{\partial t}[/tex], and come by the lorentz force plus and faraday induction's law.
The fourth is derivable by these experimental laws (biot savart, coulomb...) only in the stationary case. The correction with [tex]\frac{\partial D}{\partial t}[/tex] looks as experimental valid, but i don't know by what it derives (but i'd like really know!). I know only that the [tex]\nabla \wedge H =J[/tex] is valid only in the stationary case, as you can see taking the divergence of both the sides and using the eq. of the divergence of D.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K