What is the effect of a wire with current on Ampère's circuital law?

  • Thread starter Thread starter valjok
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law
AI Thread Summary
Ampère's circuital law describes the relationship between the magnetic field around a closed loop and the current passing through it, with the integral simplifying to H = I/(2πr) for a circular loop orthogonal to the current. When considering a wire with current, each point along the wire contributes to the magnetic field at a point R, leading to an infinite magnetic field if treated as a simple sum. The formula Hl = I is inadequate for current loops due to lack of symmetry, as it applies only to infinitely long straight currents. Bending the wire alters the magnetic field distribution, making it stronger at the center and invalidating the simple formula. The discussion highlights the need for careful application of Ampère's law and the Biot-Savart law for accurate magnetic field calculations.
valjok
Messages
70
Reaction score
0
Revising my old university lectures, I have encountered the famous law of magnetic field around a closed loop:
\oint_L \mathbf{H} \cdot \mathrm{d}\boldsymbol{\ell} = \sum I

The integral is simplified down to a product Hl when the perfectly round loop is orthogonal to the current. In this case H is constant on the loop and length of a circle l = 2 Pi r, wherefrom we can derive the \mathbf{H} = \frac{I}{2 \pi r}.
For instance, if the first current goes into the screen while another comes out of it, we can compute the field at point R, which distance is r from both currents:
attachment.php?attachmentid=17383&stc=1&d=1233518255.png


H_R = H_{1R} + H_{2R} = (I_1 + I_2)/2\pi rAs I understand the writing, it allows us to compute the field in any point by just summing H from all circles orthogonal to the current direction. Everything looks fine until a wire of current is considered:
attachment.php?attachmentid=17384&stc=1&d=1233520005.png

Here, a wire with current I surrounds the point R. The wire consits of infinitely many points and there is the current in every point, so that each point of wire contributes a finite amount of field to R, resuling in infinite H. I suspect that my treatment of shape of current is too loose in the fromula Hl = I and must be clarified.
 

Attachments

  • current field.PNG
    current field.PNG
    3.2 KB · Views: 624
  • current field2.PNG
    current field2.PNG
    1.1 KB · Views: 560
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The simple formula HL=I cannot be used for a current loop, because the loop does not have the appropriate symmetry. The law of Biot-Savart for a current loop gives
H=I/2r.
 
Thank you, I have realized that my simplified formula describes the infinitely long stright line of current. This makes the fied round symmetric around it. Bending the wire distorts the field breaking its circle shape, the H becomes stronger in the center and the formula cannot be applied anymore. The infinite sum occurs when infinite number of stright current lines will be put tangently to the curve around the R :)
 
Last edited:
This is from Griffiths' Electrodynamics, 3rd edition, page 352. I am trying to calculate the divergence of the Maxwell stress tensor. The tensor is given as ##T_{ij} =\epsilon_0 (E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} E^2)+\frac 1 {\mu_0}(B_iB_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij} B^2)##. To make things easier, I just want to focus on the part with the electrical field, i.e. I want to find the divergence of ##E_{ij}=E_iE_j-\frac 1 2 \delta_{ij}E^2##. In matrix form, this tensor should look like this...
Thread 'Applying the Gauss (1835) formula for force between 2 parallel DC currents'
Please can anyone either:- (1) point me to a derivation of the perpendicular force (Fy) between two very long parallel wires carrying steady currents utilising the formula of Gauss for the force F along the line r between 2 charges? Or alternatively (2) point out where I have gone wrong in my method? I am having problems with calculating the direction and magnitude of the force as expected from modern (Biot-Savart-Maxwell-Lorentz) formula. Here is my method and results so far:- This...

Similar threads

Back
Top