Solenoidal and conservative fields

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TrickyDicky
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fields
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical properties of solenoidal and conservative vector fields, particularly in the context of their relationships with vector potentials and scalar potentials. Participants explore concepts from vector calculus, exterior calculus, and cohomology, with a focus on the implications of these properties in both Euclidean and non-Euclidean spaces.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that a solenoidal vector field implies the existence of a vector potential, while a conservative vector field does not necessarily imply this.
  • There is discussion about whether a vector field that is both conservative and solenoidal can be considered to have a vector potential.
  • One participant introduces the concept of Cartan's exterior calculus and De Rham cohomology, suggesting that locally every closed form is exact, which relates to the existence of potentials.
  • Another participant emphasizes that a curl-free vector field is the gradient of a scalar field and that a divergence-free vector field is the curl of a vector field.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of these properties in non-Euclidean spaces, questioning whether the rules apply universally.
  • Participants discuss the necessity of vanishing divergence for the existence of a vector potential, with some questioning if this condition is sufficient.
  • There are references to Maxwell's equations and their implications for electric and magnetic fields, particularly regarding their curl and divergence properties.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the definitions and implications of these mathematical concepts, particularly in the context of general manifolds.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of solenoidal and conservative fields, particularly regarding the existence of vector potentials. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing views and uncertainties present.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the properties of vector fields may depend on the topology of the space in which they are defined, and there are unresolved questions about the applicability of certain mathematical rules in non-flat spaces.

  • #91
@Ben Niehoff Yes you're right, I didn't say there aren't any such fields. I did say that we do not attribute any physical meaning to their vector potentials, as we do with the megnetic vector potential for example...
(Btw I hate the θ convention for the azimuth :P)

@Muphrid hmmm aren't monogenic functions just the generalization of analytic ones in higher dimensions? I might have missed sth, but where exactly do you prove that both of their derivatives must be zero in this decomposition?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
Trifis said:
@Muphrid hmmm aren't monogenic functions just the generalization of analytic ones in higher dimensions? I might have missed sth, but where exactly do you prove that both of their derivatives must be zero in this decomposition?

Geometric algebra allows us to represent complex numbers as being part of an exterior algebra. Basically, ##w(x,y) = u(x,y) + e^{xy} v(x,y)##, where ##e^{xy}## is a bivector.

Now, take the vector derivative of this object.

$$\nabla w= (e^x \partial_x + e^y \partial_y)w = e^x \left[\partial_x u - \partial_y v\right] + e^y \left[\partial_y u + \partial_x v\right]$$

Setting ##\nabla w = 0## enforces the Cauchy-Riemann conditions for complex differentiability. However, instead of working in the realm of complex analysis, one can factor out ##e^x## on the right to get

$$f = we^x = u e^x - v e^y \implies \nabla f = \nabla w e^x = (\nabla w) e^x = 0$$

(This explains the sign change to the y-component that is often necessary when converting between complex analysis and vector fields.) Regardless, ##f## is a vector field, and condition for analyticity--for integrability--still holds. As I showed in the decomposition posts above, as long as ##\nabla f = 0##, the function is entirely determined by its values on a closed surface, and there is no need for volume integrals to account for source terms. This is exactly in analogy to the properties of complex analytic functions. Hence, ##\nabla f = 0## is the generalization of the Cauchy-Riemann condition not only to a real 2d vector space but to arbitrary dimensions.
 

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K