Question on a step in deriving Poynting Theorem.

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter yungman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    deriving Theorem
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a step in deriving the Poynting Theorem as presented in Griffiths' "Introduction to Electrodynamics." Participants are examining the work done by electromagnetic forces on charges and the mathematical expressions involved in this derivation, particularly focusing on the relationship between charge density, current density, and the work done over time.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a derivation of the work done, expressing it as \( dW = q \vec E \cdot \vec v dt \) and questions the transition to \( \frac{dW}{dt} = \int_v (\vec E \cdot \vec J) d\tau \) as given in the book.
  • Another participant challenges the equation \( q = \rho_v d\tau \), asserting it should be \( dq = \rho d\tau \), which introduces the need for an integral in the expression for charge.
  • A later reply reiterates the correction regarding the charge equation, emphasizing the necessity of the integral form.
  • Another participant raises a concern about the assumption that \( \rho_v \) is constant across space when combining terms in the derivation, noting that the book does not specify this condition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the formulation of charge density and its implications for the derivation. There is no consensus on the assumptions about the constancy of \( \rho_v \) or the correctness of the initial derivation steps.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the derivation related to assumptions about charge density and the need for integrals, which remain unresolved in the discussion.

yungman
Messages
5,741
Reaction score
291
This is in page 346 of Griffiths "Introduction to Electrodynamics". This is regarding to work done by electromagnetic forces dW acting on charges in the interval dt.

dW = \vec F \cdot d \vec l =q( \vec E + \vec v X \vec B) \cdot d \vec l = q( \vec E + \vec v X \vec B) \cdot \vec v d t \;\;\hbox { Where }\; \vec v \;\hbox { is velocity, and }\; d \vec l = \vec v dt

\vec v X \vec B \;\hbox { is perpendicular to }\; \vec v \;\;\Rightarrow \; (\vec v X \vec B) \cdot \vec v \;=\; 0.

\hbox { Therefore }\; dW = \vec F \cdot d \vec l = q \vec E \cdot \vec v dt = \vec E \cdot \vec J d\tau d t

\hbox { Where }\; q=\rho_v d\tau, \;\hbox { and } \; \vec J = \rho_v \vec v

Here is where I have problem. From above:

\frac { d W}{dt} = (\vec E \cdot \vec J) d\tau

But the book gave:

\frac { d W}{dt} = \int_v (\vec E \cdot \vec J) d\tau

What is wrong with my derivation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your equation q=\rho_v d\tau is wrong. It should be dq, so that actually,

q=\int_V \rho d\tau

so now the integral is there.
 
Matterwave said:
Your equation q=\rho_v d\tau is wrong. It should be dq, so that actually,

q=\int_V \rho d\tau

so now the integral is there.

Thanks.
 
I have another question

dW = \vec F \cdot d \vec l =q( \vec E + \vec v X \vec B) \cdot d \vec l = q( \vec E + \vec v X \vec B) \cdot \vec v d t \;\;\hbox { Where }\; \vec v

dq=\rho_v d\tau, \;\hbox { and } \; \vec J = \rho_v \vec v

d \vec l = \vec v dt \Rightarrow\; dW = \vec F \cdot d \vec l = q \vec E \cdot \vec v dt = (\int_{v'} \rho_v dv') \;\vec E \;\cdot \;\vec v dt \;=\; \vec E \;\cdot\; [ (\int_{v'} \rho_v dv') \;\vec v ]\; dt

In order to move \;(\int_{v'} \rho_v dv')\; to combine with \vec v , \; \rho_v \; has to be a constant independent to spatial position. But the book did not specify this. Why?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
993
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K