What are Vector Fields with Zero Divergence and Curl in 2D?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on finding a vector function v(x,y,z) that satisfies both the conditions of zero divergence and zero curl, as posed in Griffiths' "Introduction to Electrodynamics." The solution involves using the relationship \nabla \times (\nabla f(\vec{x})) = 0, indicating that the curl of the gradient of a scalar function is always zero. Participants suggest exploring a 2D vector field F = and applying the Cauchy-Riemann equations to derive the necessary scalar function 'f' that meets the divergence condition.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus, specifically divergence and curl
  • Familiarity with Griffiths' "Introduction to Electrodynamics," 3rd edition
  • Knowledge of partial differential equations
  • Basic concepts of scalar and vector fields
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of divergence and curl in vector fields
  • Learn about the Cauchy-Riemann equations and their applications in vector calculus
  • Explore scalar potential functions and their relationship to vector fields
  • Investigate examples of vector fields with zero divergence and curl in 2D
USEFUL FOR

Students of electromagnetism, physicists, and mathematicians interested in vector calculus and its applications in physics, particularly in solving problems related to fluid dynamics and electromagnetic fields.

Aikon
Messages
21
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


This problem is in Introduction to Eletrodynamics, of Griffiths, 3rd edition, p.20, problem 1.19. He asks a vector function v(x,y,z), other than the constant, that has:
\nabla\cdot\vec{v}=0 \mbox{ and } \nabla\times\vec{v}=0


Homework Equations


I hope you know them.


The Attempt at a Solution


I tried to force the divergence to be zero, using \vec{v}, like this: \vec{v}=v_x(y,z)\hat{x}+v_y(x,z)\hat{y}+v_z(x,y) \hat{z}
then i solved for the curl of v to be zero and this gave me 3 partial diferencial equations, and so I stopped and decided to get help. Some ideas?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
One convenient fact that probably will help you is the fact that \nabla \times (\nabla f(\vec{x})) = 0.

Let \vec{v} = \nabla f(\vec{x}) and your second requirement is automatically satisfied. Then you just need to determine what 'f' is based on the first requirement.
 
Another suggestion -- look for a 2D field F = <u(x,y),v(x,y),0> and think about the Cauchy Riemann equations.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
771
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K