Understanding the Equation B = del x A in Electromagnetic Theory

  • Thread starter Thread starter lalligagger
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Del Mean
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the equation B = ∇ x A, which is central to electromagnetic theory and relates magnetic fields to vector potentials. The user seeks clarification on the physical interpretation of A, questioning whether it represents a real force field or is merely an arbitrary construct due to the divergence-free nature of B. There is mention of Gauss's Law for magnetic fields, indicating that the error in the proof does not stem from this equation. The conversation also touches on the application of Stokes' theorem in solving the problem. Overall, understanding the vector potential A is crucial for tackling the homework question effectively.
lalligagger
Messages
14
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Not going to write out the whole problem (yet). It's a "find the error in the incorrect proof" type of question in a section on curl and divergence.

Homework Equations



B = \nablax A is given as an equation of "electromagnetic theory" and used in the proof. It's stated that the error is not in this equation. The other equation used in the proof is Gauss's Law for magnetic fields, but I get that one.

The Attempt at a Solution



Haven't really tried; I'd like to know the physical interpretation of the above equation before I start staring at integrals. I just got through electricity and magnetism in my general physics course, but this doesn't look familiar. I'm assuming that A is some type of force field, but what field would satisfy the equation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well μH = ∇ X A

Magnetic Force
 
Thanks Pion, but can you elaborate? What is μH and how does it relate to B?
BTW, this is for a course that basically covers vector calculus that our math department doesn't in early calc classes. The question is really just about applying Stoke's theorem, which I understand pretty well. It's just the one equation that I don't get is keeping me from even starting the problem.
I can try and scan the problem if more context is needed, but it's nothing I want to write out here.
 
Ok, A is the vector potential of B. Does A have any physical meaning or is it just an arbitrary vector that must exist because \nabla\bulletB=0?
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top