I Showing that B has no discontinuities at the surface

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the continuity of the magnetic field ##\mathbf{B}## at the surface of a magnetic dipole distribution characterized by magnetization ##\mathbf{M}##. It is established that the magnetic field ##\mathbf{H}## has no discontinuity in the volume, while the surface field ##\mathbf{H}^{S}## and the magnetization ##\mu_0 \mathbf{M}## exhibit discontinuities at the surface. The participants explore the implications of these discontinuities for the continuity of the magnetic field ##\mathbf{B}##, concluding that the normal component must remain continuous due to the equation ##\mathbf{B}=\mathbf{H} + \mu_0 \mathbf{M}##. However, questions arise regarding the tangential component's continuity and the roles of charge density ##\rho## and surface charge density ##\sigma## in relation to ##\mathbf{M}##. The discussion highlights the complexities of magnetostatics, particularly in cases involving surface currents and singularities.
Mike400
Messages
59
Reaction score
6
Consider a magnetic dipole distribution in space having magnetization ##\mathbf{M}##. The potential at any point is given by:

##\displaystyle\psi=\dfrac{\mu_0}{4 \pi} \int_{V'} \dfrac{ \rho}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r'}|} dV' + \dfrac{\mu_0}{4 \pi} \oint_{S'} \dfrac{\sigma}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r'}|} dS'=\psi^{V}+\psi^{S}##

The ##\mathbf{H}## field is:

##\displaystyle\mathbf{H}=\dfrac{\mu_0}{4 \pi} \int_{V'} \rho \dfrac{\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r'}}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r'}|^3} dV' + \dfrac{\mu_0}{4 \pi} \oint_{S'} \sigma \dfrac{ \mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r'}}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r'}|^3} dS'=\mathbf{H}^{V}+\mathbf{H}^{S}##

The ##\mathbf{B}## field is:

##\mathbf{B}=\mathbf{H} + \mu_0 \mathbf{M}=\mathbf{H}^{V} + \mathbf{H}^{S} + \mu_0 \mathbf{M}##

##\mathbf{H}^{V}## has no discontinuity.

##\mathbf{H}^{S}## has discontinuity of ##\mu_0 \mathbf{M} \cdot \hat{n}## at the surface ##S'##

##\mu_0 \mathbf{M}## has discontinuity of ##\mu_0 \mathbf{M}## at the surface ##S'##

From these knowledge, how shall one deduce that ##\mathbf{B}## is continuous at the surface?

My try: (I am getting a contradiction)

We need to show that ##\mu_0 \mathbf{M} \cdot \hat{n}+\mu_0 \mathbf{M}=0##, i.e. ##\mathbf{M} \cdot \hat{n}= -\mathbf{M}##
Since the surface could be oriented at any angle w.r.t. ##\mathbf{M}## at the surface, this is a contradiction. Where am I going wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I guess what you mean is that due to
$$\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{B}=0$$
##\vec{B}##'s normal component at the surface must be continuous.

I'm also a bit lost what ##\rho## and ##\sigma## have to do with ##\vec{M}##. Without a surface magnetization (which is a bit unusual; I'm not sure, where one would find such a thing in nature) the correct solution of magnetostatics of a (hard) ferro magnet is
$$\vec{H}=-\vec{\nabla} \phi$$
with
$$\phi(\vec{x})=-\vec{\nabla}_x \cdot \int_{\mathbb{R}} \mathrm{d}^3 x' \frac{\vec{M}(\vec{x}')}{4 \pi |\vec{x}-\vec{x}'|}.$$
 
  • Informative
Likes Dale
vanhees71 said:
##\vec{B}##'s normal component at the surface must be continuous.
I know that and can be simply deduced from the equation ##\mathbf{B}=\mathbf{H} + \mu_0 \mathbf{M}=\mathbf{H}^{V} + \mathbf{H}^{S} + \mu_0 \mathbf{M}##. But should the tangential component of ##\vec{B}## must be continuous too? The equation shows a discontinuity in the tangential component.

vanhees71 said:
I'm also a bit lost what ##ρ## and ##σ## have to do with ##\vec{M}##
##ρ=-\nabla \cdot \mathbf{M}## and ##σ=\mathbf{M} \cdot \hat{n}##
 
Last edited:
The tangential component of ##\vec{H}## can have a singularity due to a surface current, and usually also ##\vec{B}## has one there too.

The standard example is a homogeneously magnetized body. The magnetization is equivalent to a current density
$$\vec{j}_{\text{m}}=\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{M},$$
and in this approximation that's a surface current density.

E.g., take a homogeneously magnetized sphere of radius ##a## around the origin of the coordinate system. Then we can write (with ##r=|\vec{x}|##)
$$\vec{M}(\vec{x})=M \vec{e}_3 \Theta(a-r).$$
The curl is
$$\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{M}=-M \vec{e}_3 \times \vec{\nabla} \Theta(a-r).$$
Now
$$\vec{\nabla} \Theta(a-r)=\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} r} \Theta(a-r) \vec{\nabla r} = -\frac{\vec{x}}{r} \delta(a-r)=-\frac{\vec{x}}{a} \delta(a-r)$$
and thus
$$\vec{j}_{\text{m}}=\frac{M}{a} \vec{e}_3 \times \vec{x} \delta(r-a),$$
i.e., you have ##\delta##-function like singularity across the surface of the sphere which means that there's a surface-current density.

It's a good example to calculate the magnetic displacement ##\vec{H}## and the magnetic field ##\vec{B}## for this example, which is analytically solvable. Then the concepts of charge and current densities as well as their singular cases, i.e., surface charge and current densities become clear.
 
Thread 'Why higher speeds need more power if backward force is the same?'
Power = Force v Speed Power of my horse = 104kgx9.81m/s^2 x 0.732m/s = 1HP =746W Force/tension in rope stay the same if horse run at 0.73m/s or at 15m/s, so why then horse need to be more powerfull to pull at higher speed even if backward force at him(rope tension) stay the same? I understand that if I increase weight, it is hrader for horse to pull at higher speed because now is backward force increased, but don't understand why is harder to pull at higher speed if weight(backward force)...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K