Understanding Boundary Conditions: Why 33.22abe is False

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around boundary conditions in electromagnetism, specifically addressing the validity of certain equations related to electric field continuity. Participants are examining the implications of discontinuities in the electric field and their effects on related equations.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are exploring the implications of discontinuities in the electric field and questioning the reasoning behind the author's claims regarding the equations 33.22a and 33.22b. There is a discussion about the use of contradiction as a proof method and the clarity of the author's arguments.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants seeking clarification on the author's points and the validity of certain statements. Some guidance has been offered regarding the continuity of the electric field, but there is no explicit consensus on the interpretations being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating potential misprints and clarifying terminology, such as "contraction proof," which may affect their understanding of the problem. There is an acknowledgment of language barriers that may impact communication.

Bert
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
what do mean the author by the red underline line?
http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/7404/contfv6.jpg

Why would 33.22abe false? Thanks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
His point is that a discontinuity in E_\parallel would require an infinite dB/dt.
The continutiy of E_\parallel is more frequently shown usilng Stokes' theorem, which I think is a bit clearer, but also depends on finite dB/dt.
 
Oké thanks I understand that.

But by contradiction if 33.22b would be discontinue than equation 33.22a would be false why can he say that?

The first argument about the continuity of 33.2b is clear but for me not the second contraction proof.
 
I think his mention 0f 33.2a is a misprint.
I don't know what you mean by "contraction proof".
 
Sorry for my bad English I mean a proof by contradiction.
 

Similar threads

Green's Function Boundary Conditions
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Green's Function with Neumann Boundary Conditions
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Maxwell Equations Absorbent Boundary Conditions
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Graduate Boundary conditions sufficient to ensure uniqueness of solution?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Understanding the heat equation solution derived in this article
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Undergrad Query on Electromagnetic Theory (Dielectric Boundary Conditions)
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Undergrad The boundary conditions at infinity
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
5K
Undergrad Heat Equation: Solve with Non-Homogeneous Boundary Conditions
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Graduate Why is "method of image current" valid in magnetostatics?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Boundary condition for a flow past a spherical obstacle
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K