Surface current density problem

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around proving that the line-integral of a static surface current density Js along any cross-section of a narrow strip yields the same total current I. Participants clarify that the direction of the differential element dl in these integrals is perpendicular to the line segment, emphasizing that these are surface integrals with the third dimension collapsed. The application of Gauss's theorem is debated, with a focus on ensuring that dl is correctly defined as perpendicular to the surface rather than tangential. The challenge lies in interpreting the divergence theorem correctly in two dimensions and considering alternative approaches like Stokes' theorem. The conversation highlights the complexity of the problem and the need for careful mathematical reasoning.
ppoonamk
Messages
27
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A static surface current density Js(x,y) is confined to a narrow strip in the xy-plane In this
static problem ∇ ⋅Js = 0. Show that the line-integral of Js along any cross-section of the strip will yield the same value for the total current I. (The direction of dl in these 2D line-integrals is perpendicular to the line segment; these are not ordinary line-integrals but rather surface integrals in which the third dimension z has shrunk to zero.) Show that I =∫ Jsxdy =∫ Jsydx, where the integrals are over the width of the strip at any desired cross-section.


Homework Equations



Gauss’s theorem: ∫∫ (∇ ⋅Js)dxdy =∫ Js ⋅dl

The Attempt at a Solution




I don not understand this line The direction of dl in these 2D line-integrals is perpendicular to the line segment; these are not ordinary line-integrals but rather surface integrals in which the third dimension z has shrunk to zero.

The RHS of Gauss’s theorem = I
LHS:
Integrating from x1 to x2 where x2-x1 =Δx, dl is perpendicular to the line segment.
∫ Js ⋅dl= JsyΔx
similarly Integrating from y1 to y2 where y2-y1 =Δy, dl is perpendicular to the line segment.
∫ Js ⋅dl= JsxΔy

Is this right? How do I prove the 2nd part of the question?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You need to be careful with your dl.
∫∫ (∇ ⋅Js)dxdy =∫ Js ⋅dl
The way you wrote Gauss' theorem down (in 2d) suggests that dl is tangential to the circumference of the cross section. Given that on the LHS you have ∇ ⋅Js = 0 tells you that I=0, which is indeed true if you define I as the current that goes AROUND your cross-section.
However, what you are actually looking for is ∫ Js ⋅ n dA, n being perpendicular to the surface.
So this is actually a tricky question for which you need to think a little bit about the divergence theorem in 2d and 3d and so on.
Also, instead of Gauss' theorem, you could use Stokes' theorem. But you need to think about stuff very carefully.
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
20K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
12K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
10K