Understanding Ampere's Law, Gauss's Law, and the Continuity Equation

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on Ampere's Law, Gauss's Law, and the Continuity Equation in electrodynamics. Ampere's Law is defined as \nabla \times B = \mu J, while Gauss's Law is expressed as \nabla \cdot E = \frac{1}{\epsilon} \rho. The Continuity Equation, \vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{J} = -\frac{\partial\rho}{\partial t}, indicates that a current (J) results from a change in charge density (\rho). The conversation clarifies that a non-zero current implies a non-zero charge density, but not vice versa, emphasizing the relationship between current and charge movement.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus, particularly divergence and curl.
  • Familiarity with electromagnetic concepts, specifically Ampere's Law and Gauss's Law.
  • Knowledge of charge density and current density in electrodynamics.
  • Basic grasp of four-vectors in physics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the mathematical derivation of the Continuity Equation in electrodynamics.
  • Explore the implications of the four-current vector in special relativity.
  • Investigate applications of Ampere's Law in circuit design and electromagnetic field theory.
  • Learn about charge conservation principles and their role in electrical engineering.
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, electrical engineers, and anyone interested in deepening their understanding of electromagnetic theory and its applications in real-world scenarios.

touqra
Messages
284
Reaction score
0
The Ampere's Law is \nabla \times B = \mu J and Gauss's Law is \nabla \cdot E = \frac{1}{\epsilon} \rho

Since J is current density, is it right to say that, J = \frac{d}{dt} \rho in general?
I am abit confused, since I know that a current four-vector, (\rho , J) is similar to a spacetime four-vector (t, x). But, x is not \frac{d}{dt} t

Also, does a non-zero J automatically implies a non-zero \rho ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think what you are looking for is the continuity equation in electrodynamics:

\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{J} = -\frac{\partial\rho}{\partial t}

In words, it states that a current must be caused by a change in the overall charge density of the system. So, a current implies a changing charge density.
 
Last edited:
Sorry to butt in, but could you put that continuity equation into words a bit further? What does each symbol rerpesent? I just finished my associate degree and I'm taking at least one semester off, but I want to keep increasing my general knowledge while I'm not attending formal classes.

Thanks.
 
In words the continuity equation means that positive divergence of current results in a negative rate of charge density, or (in integral form) the outward flux of current over a closed surface results in a reduction of charge contained within the surface.
As the OP says, conceptually current is movement of charge, so the continuity equation is fairly intuitive.
 
touqra said:
Since J is current density, is it right to say that, J = \frac{d}{dt} \rho in general?
I am abit confused, since I know that a current four-vector, (\rho , J) is similar to a spacetime four-vector (t, x). But, x is not \frac{d}{dt} t

Also, does a non-zero J automatically implies a non-zero \rho ?

In general:

\vec{J}=\rho\vec{v}

You can think of this as the "solution to the continuity equation" mentioned earlier. It also might explain your confusion about the current 4-vector.

So a nonzero current certainly implies nonzero charge density (how can you have a current without a charge?) but not vice versa (since a charge distribution at rest has no current).
 
LURCH said:
Sorry to butt in, but could you put that continuity equation into words a bit further? What does each symbol rerpesent? I just finished my associate degree and I'm taking at least one semester off, but I want to keep increasing my general knowledge while I'm not attending formal classes.

Thanks.

The continuity equation basically says that if you have some amount of current leaving some point, then the charge at that point must be decreasing. This makes sense since current is defined basically as movement of charge. If we have current leaving some point, then we have charge moving away from that point. If there is charge moving away from a point, then the charge at that point must be decreasing. The continuity equation is, in the end, another way to state conservation of charge.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
705
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
624
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
748
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
882