The right definition of magnetic field?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the definition of a magnetic field, contrasting a personal interpretation as a vector field interacting with moving charges against Wikipedia's definition as a field generated by electric currents and magnetic materials. Participants question why the definition emphasizes generation rather than interaction, similar to the electric field's definition based on force per charge. Some argue that the two definitions are not contradictory, comparing it to how a cow is defined as a female bovine while also being known for producing milk. The conversation also touches on the reliability of Wikipedia as a source, with suggestions to amend any inaccuracies. Overall, the debate highlights the nuances in defining physical concepts and the importance of clarity in scientific terminology.
physics user1
I thought the definition was: a vectorial field that interacts with a moving charge
But wikipedia says it's a field generated by electric currents and magnetic materials...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field
Why is in the definition the way it is Generated?

When we had defined the electric field we said that is a vectorial field that acts on a charge (that exerts a force on the charge) we basically defined E as E= F/q, why can't we make the same for B? Using the Lorentz force, defining B using the force that acts on the moving charge?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Cozma Alex said:
I thought the definition was: a vectorial field that interacts with a moving charge
But wikipedia says it's a field generated by electric currents and magnetic materials...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field
Why is in the definition the way it is Generated?

When we had defined the electric field we said that is a vectorial field that acts on a charge (that exerts a force on the charge) we basically defined E as E= F/q, why can't we make the same for B? Using the Lorentz force, defining B using the force that acts on the moving charge?

I don't see the problem here. Are they contradictory? This is like saying that a cow is a female bovine while the other says that a cow produces milk.

Besides, why would what Wikipedia use as a "definition" matter?

Zz.
 
Cozma Alex said:
But wikipedia says
If you don't like what Wikipedia says then just fix it.
 

Thread 'What determines if wave components are independent vs coherent?'

I'm working through something and want to make sure I understand the physics. In a system with three wave components at 120° phase separation, the total energy calculation depends on how we treat them: If coherent (add amplitudes first, then square): E = (A₁ + A₂ + A₃)² = 0 If independent (square each, then add): E = A₁² + A₂² + A₃² = 3/2 = constant In three-phase electrical systems, we treat the phases as independent — total power is sum of individual powers. In light interference...
View full post »

Similar threads

Undergrad Charge movement relative to magnetic field frame dependence/invariance
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Undergrad Defining the Forces from Magnetic Fields and Electric Fields
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Undergrad Magnetic field as result of length contraction
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
High School Electric Field Created by 2 Infinite Plates
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Question on the Lorentz force: Why is the force not F=q(v×B) = F=qv×qB
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
High School Force Exerted on a Conductor by a Homogeneous Magnetic Field
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Graduate Origin of Hertzian dipole radiation
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Undergrad Confused about work done on charge
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
Undergrad Question on Hall Effect and magnetic force
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Undergrad Hall effect -- is it always applicable?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K